UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Developers’ guide to profitable housing Vaughn, Thomas Mack 1976

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1976_A7_3 V38.pdf [ 16.51MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0100137.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0100137-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0100137-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0100137-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0100137-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0100137-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0100137-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0100137-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0100137.ris

Full Text

A DEVELOPERS' GUIDE TO PROFITABLE HOUSING by THOMAS MACK VAUGHN B.Arch.(H.Hons.), Idaho State University, 1974 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (School of Architecture) We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May 1976 © Thomas Mack Vaughn, 1976 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Brit ish Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Depa rtment The University of Brit ish Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 i i ABSTRACT The c e n t r a l argument of t h i s guide i s t h a t there are des ign f e a t u r e s , d e t a i l s , p r o c e s s e s , and d e c i s i o n s i n hous ing development which can he lp the d e v e l o p e r s ' r e t u r n on h i s investment . The g u i d e l i n e s have 3 purposes : 1. to improve the d e v e l o p e r ' s awareness of the major problems i n hous ing development; 2. to l e s s e n the r i s k s of f r o n t end c o s t s ( p r o f e s s i o n a l f e e s , l a n d h o l d i n g c o s t s , i n t e r e s t on borrowed c a p i t a l , e t c . b e f o r e p r o j e c t approva l and up to f i n a l s a l e s ) as governmental agenc ies o v e r s e e i n g development p r o l i f e r a t e and p u b l i c r e s i s t a n c e becomes s o p h i s t i c a t e d ; 3. to demonstrate t h a t des ign ( s o p h i s t i c a t i o n , e l e g a n c e , e x p e r t i s e ) does not n e c e s s a r i l y cut i n t o the d e v e l o p e r ' s p r o f i t but can i n c r e a s e t h a t p r o f i t and reduce the r i s k s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t . Three ways i n which des ign f e a t u r e s may r e l a t e to development p r o f i t are examined i n the g u i d e l i n e s . 1) Cost R e d u c t i o n : i m a g i n a t i v e and c a r e f u l des ign can reduce the m a t e r i a l s r e q u i r e d , l e s s e n the amount of energy consumed, o p t i m i z e on f r e e o r e x i s t i n g r e s o u r c e s , and improve the e f f i c i e n c y of c o n s t r u c t i o n . 2) Delay P r e v e n t i o n : complete des ign p roposa ls w i l l a v o i d e r r o r s and omiss ions on the p l a n s , p r o v i d e e a r l y c o o r d i n a t i o n among the d e s i g n team, u t i l i t y and s e r v i c i n g companies and the l e v e l s of government i n v o l v e d , and address the concerns of the p u b l i c and governmental p l a n n e r s t o l e s s e n r e s i s t a n c e t o p r o j e c t a p p r o v a l . 3) M a r k e t a b i l i t y : the manner i n which f e a t u r e s of the s i t e a re d e a l t w i t h and used i n the development, and the i n c l u s i o n of c e r t a i n des ign f e a t u r e s have s t r o n g market appea l which g i ve the deve loper a c o m p e t i t i v e 'edge w i t h s a l e s o r l e a s i n g . The guide i s broken i n t o f o u r c h a p t e r s , each a main a r e a of concern i n hous ing development: the s i t e ; the i n f r a s t r u c t u r e ; the open space sys tem; and the d w e l l i n g u n i t . In each chapter there are i i i nine to twelve sections; the section i s a design feature, item or process. Each section introduces the design feature, l i s t s points of concern, aspects to be considered, and may have some recommendations to be followed. The ways t h i s feature can help p r o f i t are l i s t e d according to Cost Reduction, Delay Prevention, and Marketability. L a s t l y , each section may contain examples cases i n point, and refer the reader to other i l l u s t r a t i o n s . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. Introduction 1 Chapter I: The Site 9 1:1 Topographical Survey 10 1:2 Geological Survey 12 1:3 S o i l Survey 14 1:4 Flora and Fauna 16 1:5 Hydrographical Survey 17 1:6 Meteorological Survey 20 1:7 H i s t o r i c a l / C u l t u r a l Survey 23 1:8 Interface with Surrounds 23 1:9 Site Analysis 25 Chapter I I : The Infrastructure . 28 11:1 Street Layout 29 11:2 Street Design 33 11:3 Parking 36 11:4 Carports and Garages 39 11:5 Development Entrance 41 11:6 Graphic Communication 43 11:7 S i t e Drainage 44 11:8 U t i l i t i e s 46 11:9 Garbage Collection 48 11:10 Postal Service 49 Chapter I I I : The Open Space System 51 111:1 Open Spaces 52 111:2 Community Centre/Recreational F a c i l i t i e s 54 111:3 Play Area 59 111:4 Pedestrian Paths 61 V 111:5 Bicycle Paths 62 IH:6 Intersection of C i r c u l a t i o n Modes 66 111:7 Development Lighting 68 111:8 Water 68 111:9 Plant Material 71 Chapter IV: The Dwelling Unit 74 IV:1 Cluster Concept 76 IV:2 Building Height 78 IV:3 Security 82 IV:4 Unit Relationships 83 IV:5 Unit Design - Transition Space 87 IV:6 Unit Entrance 88 IV:7 Unit Design - Layout 88 IV:8 Design for the Handicapped 90 IV:9 Storage 91 IV:10 I n t e r i o r Lighting 94 IV:11 Fireplace Design 96 IV:12 Private Outdoor Spaces 99 References 102 Related Bibliography 107 v i LIST OF FIGURES AND ILLUSTRATIONS PAGE NO. Figure 1. Format of design items 8 Figure 2. A r o l l i n g s i t e 11 Figure 3v A housing development maintains s o i l s t a b i l i t y 11 Figure 4; A natural s i t e and two approaches to development 13 Figure 5. Geological survey of the s i t e 14 Figure 6. Unstable s o i l s 15 Figure 7. Seasonal variations 19 Figure 8. Shelter 21 Figure 9. Solar protection 22 Figure 10. Transition or buffer areas 25 Figure 11. Site analysis 26 Figure 12. Hierarchy of streets 30 Figure 13. Various street widths and functions 32 Figure 14. Negative buyer impact 34 Figure 15. P o s i t i v e buyer impact 34 Figure 16. Clustered parking 35 Figure 17. Parking underneath the units 35 Figure 18. A large parking area 37 Figure 19. Poor parking planning 37 Figure 20. Pedestrian entrance 'gate' 40 Figure 21. Auto entrance gates 40 Figure 22. Entrance kiosk 42 Figure 23. Signs 42 Figure 24. Catch basin 45 Figure 25. Poor u t i l i t y design 47 Figure 26. Imaginative garbage receptacle 47 Figure 27. E f f i c i e n t open space system 53 v i i Figure 28. Extravagant open space 53 Figure 29. Community recreation f a c i l i t i e s 55 Figure 30. Cluster community centre 55 Figure 31. A recycled mansion 57 Figure 32. Reflecting pool 57 Figure 33. Play furniture 60 Figure 34. Curving walks 60 Figure 35. Various cycle paths 63 Figure 36. Safe intersections 65 Figure 37. Development l i g h t i n g 67 Figure 38. A pond 69 Figure 39. A stream 69 Figure 40. An a r t i f i c i a l pond 70 Figure 41. An a r t i f i c i a l stream 70 Figure 42. Advantage of berms and dense foliage 72 Figure 43. Various stages and types of clustering 75 Figure 44. Row house and multi-story unit clustering 77 Figure 45. Zero l o t l i n e concept 77 Figure 46. Intimate walk 81 Figure 47. Gate to semi-private area 81 Figure 48. Cramped s i t i n g 84 Figure 49. Spacious private outdoor space 84 Figure 50. Unit relationships 86 Figure 51. Six points of privacy i n the dwelling unit 89 Figure 52. Outdoor l i g h t i n g 93 Figure 53. Indoor l i g h t i n g 93 Figure 54. Fireplace design 95 Figure 55. Balcony configurations 97 v i i i Figure 56. Condominium balconies 98 Figure 57. Garden apartment balcony 98 Figure 58. Private outdoor spaces 100 Figure 59. Fenced patios 100 i x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to extend my sincerest thanks to my mentor Professor Richard Seaton for his i n s i g h t , d i l i g e n t concern, and constructive assistance during t h i s thesis research, compilation and w r i t i n g . I also o f f e r deepest gratitude to Professor Wolfgang Gerson for the sensitive and thoughtful attention he has given to my work. In addition, I give a special thank you to my typ i s t Margaret McLaverty on whom I have been able to depend to complete the f i n a l thesis w r i t i n g . Lastly, gratitude i s expressed for the students, professors, design professionals, planners, developers, consultants and other resource persons i n B r i t i s h Columbia, Idaho, and Utah, who s i g n i f i -cantly helped with the background and formation of these guidelines. -1-INTRODUCTION This manual i s concerned with design features, processes, and decisions of housing development, and how these provide a benefit for the developer. The aim of th i s design guide i s to c i t e aspects of design which avoid costly p i t f a l l s l i k e delays. These include delays derived from design omissions and community/government resistance, loss of unrecoverable resources, wasteful use of materials and energy, and loss of potential i n t e n s i t y of development. The central assumption i s that there are many design features and deta i l s - often overlooked by the developer - which can improve the return on investment. A housing developer i s an entrepreneur whose business i s producing houses. In a society of s p e c i a l i s t s , the average man does not have the time nor the expertise to b u i l d his own home (Heywood). A Harvard-MIT study shows that for the next ten years, 27,000 households w i l l be formed each week i n the United States (National Association of Home Builders' f i l m , The PUD, 1971). As only about 10 percent of the homes constructed i n North American are owner b u i l t (Turner), the developer f u l f i l l s an important need of society. To continue with his business, the developer needs recurring c a p i t a l . I f his investment i s not returned, along with some margin of p r o f i t , a housing developer i s not able to begin another project. The creation of a housing project i s a complex process for the developer including land assembly, design inception, finance, design approval, design d e t a i l s , construction, and sales. The housing developer builds houses; however, he also i s charged with servicing the s i t e including u t i l i t i e s , s t r e ets, etc., with s i t e work such as grading and landscaping with construction of support structures l i k e playgrounds, community f a c i l i t i e s , etc., and with d e t a i l s l i k e walks, -2-l i g h t i n g , and garbage c o l l e c t i o n . Dur ing the development p rocess he i n v e s t s l a r g e sums o f c a p i t a l i n l a n d , m a t e r i a l s , men, and p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s . P r o f i t i s an i n c e n t i v e to b u i l d , a n e c e s s i t y to m a i n t a i n a b u s i n e s s i n the l o n g r u n , and the needed source of money to cont inue b u i l d i n g , but there a re always r i s k s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p r o f i t . The purpose of t h i s manual i s to l e s s e n the r i s k s o f development w i t h c o n t r i b u t i o n s of a r c h i t e c t u r a l des ign f e a t u r e s and p r o c e s s e s . The g u i d e l i n e s focus on t h r e e ways i n which des ign avo ids p i t f a l l s to p r o f i t . 1) COST REDUCTION. I f ten u n i t s o f a m a t e r i a l o r l a b o u r can be used i n s t e a d of the u s u a l 20 u n i t s of m a t e r i a l or l a b o u r cos t has been reduced. The deve loper has the o p t i o n of charg ing the same p r i c e f o r a h i g h e r r e t u r n , or reduc ing the r e t a i l p r i c e f o r a c o m p e t i t i v e edge when money i s s a v e d . There a re two o f t e n o v e r -l o o k e d ways o f r e d u c i n g c o s t s . F i r s t , use e x i s t i n g resources on the s i t e . The l a y o f the l a n d , s i t e p r o c e s s e s , e x i s t i n g v e g e t a t i o n , w i l d l i f e , bod ies o f w a t e r , v i e w s , and s t r u c t u r e s are a l l resources to u s e , not to remove. Second, conserve the energy used i n c o n s t r u c t i o n . W a s t e f u l amounts o f s i t e work i n the t y p i c a l development i n c l u d e i n e f f i c i e n t s c a t t e r e d and uncoord inated c o n s t r u c t i o n , e x c e s s i v e and uncoord inated s i t e g r a d i n g , unnecessary s i t e s t r i p p i n g , e t c . Design wh ich uses l e s s m a t e r i a l s , l e s s energy , and e x i s t i n g ( f r e e ) resources reduces the c o s t of development. 2) DELAY PREVENTION. Of ten i gnored as an aspect o f d e s i g n , t ime l o s s e s i n t e n s i f y f i n a n c i a l p r e s s u r e s , and s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t r e t u r n . O m i s s i o n s , c o o r d i n a t i o n , p u b l i c r e s i s t a n c e , and governmental r e s i s t a n c e are f o u r sources of de lay i n f l u e n c e d d i r e c t l y by d e s i g n . Omissions -3-cause rejection for changes and additions at the plan review stage; they also can cause costly changes of the plans and on-site work. Coordination i s always important i n the complex building process. Cost, supply, delivery, location, i n s t a l l a t i o n , and ownership of the materials from each servicing company must be agreed upon early among the developer and the several companies. Fail u r e to consult and to coordinate the servicing companies causes time loss and costly revisions of the plans. Public reaction i s a potent force against the developer. Most complaints are without foundation, but the developer should address these fears to dispe l them. Environmental damage, disruption of s i t e and w i l d l i f e processes, unnecessary impact on streets, parks, and schools, and other neighbourhood disruptions are v a l i d grounds for informed residents to r e s i s t project approval both at public hearings and i n the courts. The public - p a r t i c u l a r l y environmental, conserv-a t i o n a l , and h i s t o r i c preservational groups - are increasingly using sophisticated l e g a l techniques to oppose developments which disrupt the ecology or history of a s i t e . 3) MARKETABILITY. Many design features and d e t a i l s appeal to buyers and leasers. Popular design features along with the character of the development, influence the buyer/leasers' f i n a l decision. Market-a b i l i t y can be rephrased as public acceptance or buyer/leaser appeal. Urban Land I n s t i t u t e publications on housing (Harmon; Norcross, 1966, 1968, etc.) l i s t some popular sales features. The i n d i v i d u a l developer's experience w i l l confirm some of these; however, for an accurate assessment of popular sales features, a market analysis i s required. -4-Marketability i n th i s guideline i s considered as i n i t i a l buyer/ leaser appeal - short term; however, a developer should also consider the p o t e n t i a l l y more l u c r a t i v e benefits of long term marketability. These are i n d i r e c t , secondary, and shadow values. In r e n t a l management one could receive i n d i r e c t benefits including low rental turnover, and condominium management could gain resale and r e n t a l commissions. Shadow values would include increased adjacent land values and lo c a t i o n a l benefits for commercial outlets and business o f f i c e s . Indirect value would include developer image and general public acceptance and tru s t . Numerous guidelines have been written for housing developers. Many municipalities have issued guidelines dealing with the approval process, physical requirements of a project, and l e g a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s such as City of New York design guides for apartment towers and City of Vancouver, B.C., West End Design Guidelines. The Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t Planning Department has issued guidelines for quality i n compact (medium density) housing developments, and the City of Pocatello, Idaho, i s wri t i n g a master plan and zoning ordinances based i n part on development q u a l i t i e s . This guideline i s of unique interest to the developer because i t c i t e s aspects of design which have a relationship to develop-ment p r o f i t . I t examines design features which influence the developer's ultimate success with a project. Other aspects of the development process such as financing, cash flow, design management, construction management, and sales promotion which also influence the project's success, are not dealt with i n th i s manual. There are three major reasons for w r i t i n g these guidelines. 1) An architect i s viewed as a luxury or non-essential extra by many developers. Some developers f e e l architects only add to the cost of the project, c l u t t e r i t with unimportant f r i l l s , and usually mar an -5-otherwise straight-forward project. Some developers w i l l h i r e an architect only when the law requires the inclusion of a design professional or when the desired development package requires technical complexity and sophistication of design beyond lay a b i l i t i e s . Housing i s becoming a problem with complexities that require the professional assistance of architects, landscape architects, design consultants, engineers, physical planners, s o c i a l planners, economic consultants, and business and construction manage-ment consultants. These guidelines show that professional services can reduce cost, prevent delays, and increase marketability thus ultimately improving the success of the project. 2) As the number of governmental agencies and departments over-seeing development p r o l i f e r a t e , as t h e i r authority and control increases, as th e i r sophistication of review increases, and as public awareness and involvement increase, developers w i l l need better-informed, complete, detailed development proposals. Front end costs including professional fees, landholding costs, interest on borrowed c a p i t a l , etc. r i s e , but guarantee of project approval and market success dwindle. These guidelines i l l u s t r a t e ways that design can speed approval, prevent delays, and enhance f i n a l sales appeal. 3) This guideline w i l l improve the developer's awareness of major problems i n housing development. Some developers may not under-stand the potentials of his business. Others, who already use these design features, may need to reconsider them from a new perspective. The design features and processes are a beginning for further investigation. A housing developer should also consider using his design team from the s t a r t of the project. Often, the average developer w i l l pick -6-the s i t e , decide house s t y l e , form, tenure, etc., and arrange i n i t i a l financing, then h i r e an architect or engineer for preliminary sub-d i v i s i o n , and other design professionals as needed. On larger projects -over 50 units - or more complex projects - multi-family - the design team i s needed from project inception for coordination, consultation, and to insure a complete compatible design proposal. I f hired one at a time there might w e l l be aspects of the plan overlooked or incorrect which w i l l need to be changed leading to increased cost, or certain features might need to be redesigned to accommodate other requirements of the development and so on. Another problem that might arise i s communication among the parties. Early inclusion of a complete design team w i l l a l l e v i a t e design delays and changes. The manual addresses design features and d e t a i l s for housing developments of low and medium density. The range of developments vary from low density - 1 unit/acre or less - single-family projects to three story walk-ups with a density of 35 units/acre. The average project would be 6 units/acre to 21 units/acre attached single-family, townhouse, and garden apartment projects. Many of the guidelines may be applicable to other forms of housing such as the apartment tower, mobile homes, and dormitories. While the guidelines are aimed at housing for people i n the family cycle (Foote), many of the features may be applicable to housing for singles, the el d e r l y , or students. The following guidelines are grouped i n four areas of housing develop-ment concern: the s i t e ; the infrastructure; the open space system; and the dwelling unit. One l a s t note, the origins of the i l l u s t r a t i o n s and examples come from the personal experiences of the author. The places of experience are: Boise, Twin F a l l s , Sun Valley, and Pocatello, Idaho; Logan, Ogden, -7-and Salt Lake, Utah; Denver, Colorado Springs, and Boulder, Colorado; Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington; and Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia, where experience was gained through planning, design work, schooling and personal investigations. -8-CHAPTER ( o n e D f four areas of design i n housing development) ITEM ( s p e c i f i c design item for discussion) A b r i e f discussion follows concerning what the item e n t a i l s and points to be considered. (this i s the explanation of how the item can influence p r o f i t i f applicable) COST REDUCTION: (less spent on materials, manpower, energy or time) DELAY PREVENTION: (includes omissions, coordination, and public/ governmental resistance) MARKETABILITY: (public preference, popular housing d e t a i l s and sales features) I l l u s t r a t i o n s — w r i t t e n and p i c t o r i a l — f o l l o w here. FIGURE 1. Format of design items: the design feature or process i s one section. Each section w i l l be arranged i n th i s fashion. -9-\ CHAPTER I THE SITE This chapter l i s t s the i n i t i a l design processes encountered by the design team. Site inventories and s i t e analysis give three benefits: (1) I t informs the design team concerning the conditions of the s i t e , (2) The process graphically displays a l l the resources and l i a b i l i t i e s of the s i t e , and (3) I t protects the developer from costly errors and possible public/governmental resistance. -10-1:1 TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY Basic understanding of the s i t e begins with a study of the lay of the land, which i s the important i n i t i a l survey of the s i t e , common to a l l projects. After a topographical map i s made of the s i t e with contour i n t e r v a l s of 1, 2, or 5 feet, a percent slope map i s made. The percent of slope usually i s marked at breaks of 0-5, 5-8, 8-10, 10-15, 15-20, 20-25, and over 25% (Rubenstein, p. 13). This indicates buildable, problem, and non-buildable areas of the s i t e . Buildable areas would be f l a t areas up to about 8% slope. Problem areas are greater than 8% up to about 20% slope. Depending on building form and s i t e conditions, most slopes greater than 20% are not capable of supporting structures. Steep lands and ridges are central to the problem of flood control. The U.S. S o i l Conservation Service (Roberts) states that slopes i n excess of 12% are not f i t for c u l t i v a t i o n and are unsuitable for housing development. I. McHarg i n Design With Nature, recommends such slopes are best used for forestry and recreation with some low density housing (1 unit/3 acres maximum). COST REDUCTION) Costs w i l l be reduced by: A) designing units to f i t the s i t e which eliminates costly s i t e l e v e l l i n g and grading, B) where steep areas permit only low net density development, cluster the units (create higher net density) to eliminate costly roads and u t i l i t i e s i n a low density design. Clustering also improves the ef f i c i e n c y of construction by ce n t r a l i z i n g i t (Stone, p. 97; Whyte, p. 17). DELAY PREVENTION) I f there i s not a topographical map of the s i t e , and no slope analysis for r o l l i n g s i t e s , the plan w i l l be rejected at the s i t e review stage u n t i l they are provided. Attempts to b u i l d on steep slopes w i l l bring resistance from environmental groups and governmental planners. -11-FIGURE 2. A Rollin g S i t e : Sites with h i l l s , benches, and ravines require careful planning. Each s i t e has resources such as vegetation, water bodies, view, etc. •' , r , : ',.*t : I FIGURE 3. A housing development maintains s o i l s t a b i l i t y : Note the natural s i t e grasses have been retained to prevent the s o i l from being soaked and creeping. A unique esthetic value has been achieved also (Ketchum, Idaho (Sun V a l l e y ) ) . -12-MARKETABILITY) Designs which take advantage of the topography for views, variations i n s i t i n g , and privacy appeal to the buyer/leaser. See figures 2, 3, 4, and 32. 1:2 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geological forces which shaped the s i t e , continue and could impinge on the development. Notable are flood plains. P e r i o d i c a l inundation with water, s i l t , and debris, damage and destroy structures and roads. Knowledge of the geological base and landforms are important i n foundation design and construction of road beds (Lynch). Test bores are required at the location of foundation walls to give an accurate picture of the geology of the s i t e (Rubenstein). COST REDUCTION) I n i t i a l accurate complete design information w i l l allow foundations, retaining walls, etc. to be designed correctly and not be over-sized to .compensate for unknowns. DELAY PREVENTION) There are delays at the s i t e review and plan approval stages i f such investigations are not made. Unforeseen geological formations missed by test bores w i l l cause costly s t r u c t u r a l design revisions and on-site construction changes and delays. MARKETABILITY) Geological formations such as rock outcroppings and ravines can be exc i t i n g play areas for children and thus a sales appeal for the buyer/leaser (Cooper, 1975; Williams). -13-T W E £ I T £ KECiATf&o: p l O T - f H E yALL&H? W - J H fHE LEVELED H l U ^ . FIGURE 4. A Natural Site and Two Approaches to Development. -14-FIGURE 5. Geological survey of the s i t e : test bores protect building design from unknown and unexpected geological conditions. A number of developers i n Pocatello, Idaho (for example) have proceeded with simple single-family projects, only to discover i n t e r -mittent s t r a t a of rocks and boulders causing construction delays to blast and remove boulders and to change foundation designs. See figures 2, 4, and 5. 1:3 SOIL SURVEY Concurrent with the analysis of the geology of the s i t e are testing and design considerations of the s o i l s . What are i t ' s erosion characteristics? W i l l i t slump or creep? A decision must be made as to the development character and i n t e n s i t y of use the s o i l w i l l support and s t i l l prevent erosion (McHarg). Considerations of equal importance are: what w i l l happen to the s o i l during construction and what precautions must be taken during the construction process (Studley, p. 28)? A major issue i n an urbanizing area i s whether to protect or develop prime a g r i c u l t u r a l lands. The USDA category 1 s o i l s must be kept from - 1 5 -development as t h i s l a n d i s un ique l y s u i t a b l e f o r i n t e n s i v e c u l t i v a t i o n . Category 1 s o i l s may be taken out of a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n to be used f o r f o r e s t s , r e c r e a t i o n , o r open space lands f o r i n s t i t u t i o n s and hous ing p r o j e c t s w i t h a net d e n s i t y of 25 u n i t s / a c r e maximum (McHarg, p . 8 6 ) . COST REDUCTION) D i s t r i b u t i n g l e s s s o i l , k e e p i n g top s o i l from e x c a v a t i o n and h a u l i n g l e s s s o i l away o r new s o i l s to the s i t e , a l l cut c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s . DELAY PREVENTION) A t the p l a n rev iew s tage t h e r e w i l l be cont inuous de lays u n t i l these q u e s t i o n s have been addressed . The governmental body i s concerned w i t h c o n s t r u c t i o n impact and f i n i s h e d development impact on the s o i l . P o s s i b l e v i c t i m s of e r o s i o n (neighbours o f the p r o j e c t ) can d e l a y and k i l l a p o o r l y p lanned p r o j e c t a t a p l a n n i n g commission p u b l i c h e a r i n g . E n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s w i l l f i g h t the development of c l a s s 1 s o i l s i n the c o u r t s . FIGURE 6 . Unstab le s o i l s : d u r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n there can be s l i d e s and b l o w i n g s o i l s and the f i n i s h e d development may soak the s o i l c a u s i n g i t to c r e e p , o r to s l i d e d u r i n g an ear thquake. -16-MARKETABILITY) I f the s o i l i s kept i n p l a c e and top s o i l s not removed, the l u s h l a n d s c a p i n g and h e a l t h y gardens appea l to the b u y e r / l e a s e r . There a re numerous i n s t a n c e s of houses b e i n g b u i l t and then abandoned because o f s e t t l i n g , c r e e p i n g , and s lumping s o i l s . C a l i f o r n i a , p a r t i c u l a r l y , has problems w i t h houses c r e e p i n g down the h i l l s i d e s because of e x c e s s i v e l y watered lawns . B o i s e and P o c a t e l l o , Idaho, a re b e i n g c a r e f u l o f s o i l impact i n hous ing developments p lanned f o r the h i l l s i d e s . I n southern Idaho , the s o i l i s s t a b l e when d r y , bu t blows when d i s t u r b e d , and creeps when wet . C o n s t r u c t i o n , t h e r e f o r e , i s a l lowed to d i s t u r b o n l y a minimum amount of the s i t e , and the house des ignes w i l l have s m a l l lawns to prevent s o a k i n g of the s o i l (Rober ts ; S t u d l e y ) . See f i g u r e s 3 , 6 , and 36. 1 :4 FLORA AND FAUNA Inventory of e x i s t i n g v e g e t a t i o n - t r e e s , s h r u b s , p l a n t s , and grasses - i s b e n e f i c i a l to the des ign as i t i s a f r e e e x i s t i n g resource which can p r o v i d e w indbreaks , v i s u a l b u f f e r s , summer shade, s c r e e n out n o i s e s and p o l l u t a n t s , p r o v i d e a backdrop f o r a s p a c e , o r frame: a v iew (Vaughn). The e x i s t i n g v e g e t a t i o n w i l l add c o l o u r , t e x t u r e , and v a r i e t y t o the p r o j e c t ; g i v e the development an appearance of s t a b i l i t y and aged m a t u r i t y - r a t h e r than harsh newness - ; and p r o v i d e a n a t u r a l o r r u s t i c appearance. Areas of v e g e t a t i o n a re a l s o impor tant f o r f l o o d c o n t r o l , s o i l e r o s i o n s t a b i l i z a t i o n , a i r sheds , r e c r e a t i o n , and w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t s . A l a r g e development s i t e may c o n t a i n important w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t s which w i l l r e c e i v e sanctuary p r o t e c t i o n by f e d e r a l o r s t a t e departments . N e s t i n g a r e a s , f e e d i n g grounds, e t c . , o f more common v a r i e t i e s o f b i r d s and an imals can be i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the open space system add ing movement, -17-i n t e r e s t , and colour to the landscape (Rubensteln). Animals which could endanger the project such as rodents and poisonous snakes w i l l have to be exterminated. "Wooded areas especially containing w i l d l i f e habitats should have housing developments not i n excess of 1 unit/acre." (McHarg, p. 87). COST REDUCTION) By using e x i s t i n g vegetation - instead of st r i p p i n g i t out and then buying new plants - a large percentage of the landscaping budget i s saved (Rahenkamp). Clustering the low density units for wooded areas (paragraph above) eliminates costly roads and servicing, and increases construction e f f i c i e n c y . DELAY PREVENTION) Environmentalists w i l l give strong resistance to any housing proposal which eliminates delicate environmental areas or important w i l d l i f e habitats. MARKETABILITY) Natural vegetation can provide a unique esthetic appeal and i s a low maintenance feature which are attractions for the pote n t i a l buyer/leaser. See figures 3, 7, 27, 28, 31, 32, and 39. 1:5 HYDROGRAPHICAL SURVEY Surface water on or adjacent to the s i t e (ocean, lakes, ponds, r i v e r s , streams and springs) i s a design bonus. I t has esthetic value, appeal, and att r a c t i o n for both recreation and the casual s t r o l l e r , and i t can be used to help moderate the climate on the s i t e . However, water causes problems such as high water table, flooding, and erosion. The following are suggestions from Design With Nature (McHarg, p. 58) concerning various s i t e water situations. -18-Concerning surface water, the housing project should allow only water related a c t i v i t i e s on the water front, and constrain them as to not diminish present or future value for recreation, supply, or amenity. Among others, t h i s would include prohibiting roads - other than emergency access - , parking l o t s , business, industry or housing (see figure 38). When there i s surface water on the s i t e , s i t i n g of structures and support features such as roads need to be careful of and take precautions against erosion. Limited recreation and agriculture should be the only permitted land uses for marshes which are primarily w i l d l i f e habitats and water supplies. Land uses unharmed by flooding should be the only permitted uses on a 50 year flood p l a i n . Flood plains are designated as areas with the potential to be inundated with flood waters within a period of time. Usually there are annual, 10 year, 25 year, 50 year and 100 year flood plains. Agriculture, forestry, parks, and housing open space may be permitted on a flood p l a i n . The danger to an aquifer (underground water system) i s the dumping of toxic substances, sewer leaks, and so on which contaminate the water. Low density developments are acceptable as long as they pose no threat of contamination. An aquifer re-charge region, however, i s c r i t i c a l for water rechange and cleansing. Only developments which aid percolation and promote permeable land should be allowed. COST REDUCTION) Water bodies on the s i t e are free design amenities, and inexpensive open space areas (Norcross, 1966). Foreknowledge of surface and subsurface water w i l l aid correct road and foundation designs from the beginning of the design process. FIGURE 7. Seasonal variations: changes in foliage and solar radiation combine to keep the house cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter. -20-DELAY PREVENTION) I f the developer proceeds to drain marshes and ponds, bu i l d upon aquifer re-charge areas, cover streams, and so on, environ-mental groups w i l l press costly court b a t t l e s . Undiscovered springs or a high water table w i l l delay construction while costly design changes are made. MARKETABILITY) Surface water features are strong buyer/leaser attractions (Norcross, 1966, 1968; Rubenstein). See figures 2, 22, 38, and 39. 1:6 METEOROLOGICAL SURVEY The climatic characteristics of the s i t e influence the design. Seasonal v a r i a t i o n i n the angle and in t e n s i t y of solar radiation require protection from hot summer radiation and absorption of warming winter solar radiation i n most climates. Specific solar arch and angle determine proper unit orientation placement of windows, and design of eaves and other shading devices (Clegg; DeChiara). Freezing winter winds, and cooling summer breezes also influence unit orientation and location of dwelling fenestrations. Wind and snow loads are used for the design of the structure. P r e c i p i t a t i o n type and amount, and wind characteristics w i l l influence the location of doorways and overhangs for protection from inclement weather (Clegg; McHarg). - 2 1 -FIGURE 8 : S h e l t e r : p r o p e r l y o r i e n t e d ent rances and overhangs w i l l g i ve p r o t e c t i o n from inc lement weather . COST REDUCTION) Proper o r i e n t a t i o n and d e s i g n to p r o t e c t from hot s o l a r r a d i a t i o n i n the summer and to capture c o o l i n g breezes (combined w i t h v e g e t a t i o n and water bod ies ) w i l l e l i m i n a t e the need f o r a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g u n i t s i n most c l i m a t e s (C legg; G r i f f i n ; Mumford; Mo len ) . S i m i l a r care i n o r i e n t a t i o n and des ign to absorb w i n t e r s o l a r r a d i a t i o n and p r o t e c t from f r e e z i n g winds w i l l a l l o w the i n s t a l l a t i o n o f s m a l l e r h e a t i n g u n i t s ( C l e g g ; G r i f f i n , P r e n i s ) . S m a l l e r h e a t i n g u n i t s , and no a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g u n i t s to i n s t a l l i s a r e d u c t i o n i n development c o s t s . DELAY PREVENTION) A c c u r a t e weather i n f o r m a t i o n f o r each month can i n c r e a s e the e f f i c i e n c y of c o n s t r u c t i o n t i m i n g and c o o r d i n a t i o n d u r i n g months thought by the deve loper to be i m p r a c t i c a l f o r c e r t a i n types o f c o n s t r u c t i o n . MARKETABILITY) Buyers are a t t r a c t e d to n a t u r a l h e a t i n g and v e n t i l a t i o n which means a r e d u c t i o n i n energy b i l l s and a degree o f ' Independence' f rom u t i l i t y companies (C legg ; Mo len ) . See f i g u r e s 7 , 8 , and 9 . -22-FIGURE 9 . Solar protection: overhangs and eaves at windows can shade in the summer and allow the sun to penetrate in the winter. -23-1:7 HISTORICAL/CULTURAL SURVEY What are the past uses of the site? There may be some archeological significance to the s i t e which should be preserved, or which might be open to public inspection (McHarg). H i s t o r i c a l character can be a clue to a continuing design theme (Rubenstein). Existing structures on the s i t e such as a barn or warehouse can be recycled and integrated into the project design. COST REDUCTION) Exi s t i n g structures - recycled for use i n the project -are a free resource and when used, reduce the costs of construction. DELAY PREVENTION) When some important archeological s i t e or h i s t o r i c a l structure i s threatened by development plans, public pressure w i l l be strong to preserve i t . Also, rennovation of a structure may be quicker than demolition and construction of a new structure. MARKETABILITY) Old structures and h i s t o r i c a l s i t e s can add charm and unique esthetic appeal to a development providing buyer/leaser a t t r a c t i o n . See figures 27, 31, and 32. 1:8 INTERFACE WITH SURROUNDS What are the land uses of the surrounding areas, and how does this development f i t in? The exi s t i n g a r c h i t e c t u r a l s t y l e , materials, density, building height, and land uses must be considered. This does not mean the new project mirrors the surrounds; i n f a c t , i t may stand i n contrast to i t . I f the new project i s r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t , there should be a buffer or t r a n s i t i o n area (Gerson). Governmental and u t i l i t y o f f i c i a l s are concerned with the a b i l i t y of the project to l i n k into e x i s t i n g services, and i n turn allow other develop-ments to connect with i t . These linkages include water, sewer, mass - 2 4 -t r a n s i t , garbage c o l l e c t i o n , postal delivery, telephone, e l e c t r i c i t y , gas, cable t e l e v i s i o n , and street/pedestrian/bicycle path systems. COST REDUCTION) Careful linkage design which t i e s into the e x i s t i n g system with the least amount of new servicing (new sewer and water l i n e s , etc.) cuts construction costs. DELAY PREVENTION) The e x i s t i n g neighbourhood w i l l give strong opposition to most proposals at public hearings out of a fear of change. These fears - fear of the unknown - need to be addressed by the developer. The c i t y , as a service unit, and u t i l i t y companies are p a r t i c u l a r l y concerned with correct linkage to the e x i s t i n g system and the a b i l i t y of future developments to connect with t h i s project. U n t i l s a t i s f i e d with the proposed linkages, the plans w i l l be rejected for changes. MARKETABILITY) Housing projects which conveniently connect auto, mass t r a n s i t , pedestrian and bicycle t r a f f i c to the e x i s t i n g c i t y , and projects which either i d e n t i f y with the surround or disassociate with a f e e l i n g of exclusiveness and uniqueness have strong buyer/leaser appeal. In Patterns of Urban Li v i n g (Gerson), one point made i s that a new development when r a d i c a l l y d ifferent from the e x i s t i n g land uses (primarily greater building density and height), t r a n s i t i o n areas should be included. Start with the e x i s t i n g housing pattern, the new units match the old ones both i n terms of density and height. Moving to the heart of the develop-ment, the units increase i n density and height with greatest i n t e n s i t y of development at the centre of the project. This makes the development more acceptable to the surrounding neighbourhood by respecting i t s existence. A PUD i n Pocatello, Idaho, was planned with t h i s a t t i t u d e . The neighbourhood had single-family units on 10,000 square foot l o t s (duplexes -25-on 1,500 square foot l o t s are allowed but seldom used). The PUD area abusing the e x i s t i n g housing was subdivided i d e n t i c a l l y - single-family 10,000 square foot l o t s . The next area was of duplex density but i n a new configuration - zero l o t l i n e . L a s t l y , a s l i g h t l y denser townhouse and green belt system was planned. Because the project recognized the neighbourhood, and respected i t with a buffer ( t r a n s i t i o n area), the project was rapidly approved by the c i t y with few objections. See figures 10, and 45. FIGURE 10. Transition or buffer areas: A housing development can provide a buffer to respect the existing neighbourhood, and to blend with i t . 1:9 SITE ANALYSIS The s i t e analysis brings together a l l the information from the s i t e surveys, inventories, and research. The material i s put together and design decisions can be made from what i s known. The process i s as follows: -26-FIGURE 11. Site analysis. -27-On equal s i z e transparent maps of the s i t e , different factors are coloured i n . For example, slope analysis, the f l a t areas are cl e a r , the 0-5% slope i s a pale colour and so on with the steepest parts, black. Then, overlaying the maps, the l i g h t e s t areas have the least impact -McHarg refers to t h i s as least s o c i a l value - and the greatest construction p o t e n t i a l . Darker areas require careful consideration, and the darkest areas may be unsuitable for construction. Computer read-out can be used on the same p r i n c i p l e , and i s preferred on large s i t e s . While a unit value of w i l d l i f e i s not d i r e c t l y comparable with a unit value of surface water or solar radiation, a l l factors are analysed, compared, compromises reached, and r a t i o n a l trade-offs are made (McHarg). COST REDUCTION) Site analysis can help optimize design, and location decisions to cut construction costs. For example a road may cost $20/foot extra to construct on a s l i g h t l y steeper area, but i f b u i l t on the l e v e l area i t would have cost $15/foot to remove the vegetation, plus add $400 extra per l o t to landscape the l o t s rather than using natural vegetation. DELAY PREVENTION) While made to optimize on s i t e features i n the design, the analysis also gives a r a t i o n a l defense of design decisions. The analysis presents a strong case for the developer and can help prevent delays at the review and approval stages. For example, a project might be blocked by environmentalists who are f e a r f u l of losing some important stand of trees. The developer can show t h i s was considered, but they had to be removed for a road which could not be located elsewhere. MARKETABILITY) A careful s i t e analysis used to optimize design w i l l increase the ultimate market att r a c t i o n of the development. See figure 11. -28-CHAPTER I I THE INFRASTRUCTURE Communication, c i r c u l a t i o n , and s i t e services are essential elements of the development. Streets and u t i l i t i e s are expensive portions of the project, and understandably, the developer i s concerned with such matters. Successful projects consider the infrastructure a support f a c i l i t y which must be unobtrusive. Being held to a low p r i o r i t y , i t receives careful attention and d e t a i l to insure i t s unobtrusiveness. -29-11:1 STREET LAYOUT "Transportation must take i t s place as a form giver rather than a destructive element." L. Halprin, Freeways, p. 55 Lawrence Halprin suggests possible c r i t e r i a for street layout (p. 59). 1) The designer should consider the amount of land required i n cross section of the street. 2) There should be a separation between motorized t r a f f i c and pedestrians. 3) The designer should car e f u l l y plan the development's access to e x i s t i n g streets. 4) The impact on community must be evaluated. I would add 5) the impact of future developments on t h i s project must be analysed. The g r i d system has been the standard North American subdivision street layout, but i t i s unresponsive to r o l l i n g , h i l l y , or steep t e r r a i n . This system can become monotonous i n i t s r e p e t i t i o n and has low esthetic value (no f o c a l points or changing v i s t a s ) . On r e l a t i v e l y f l a t t e r r a i n , the g r i d system may be less expensive to construct because i t uses straight asphalt and curb sections (Jorgenson). The grid system o r d i n a r i l y allows large volumes of t r a f f i c onto a l l r e s i d e n t i a l streets with consequent noise, smell, and physical danger. The modern cu r v i l i n e a r system allows the designer to take advantage of the topography of a r o l l i n g s i t e . I t organizes c i r c u l a t i o n , forming a hierarchy of road types. The designer considers who w i l l be a r r i v i n g at and leaving the s i t e , how many, and whether by car, bus, truck, foot, bicycle or other means (Rubenstein). A c u r v i l i n e a r h i e r a r c h i a l system distinguishes among movement, c o l l e c t i o n , service, v i s i t i n g , and parking (Stein). This system i s related to t r a f f i c at the l o c a l l e v e l with l i t t l e through t r a f f i c , slower speeds, fewer streets, and more inter e s t i n g street views and lengths (Rubenstein). While different writers use different l a b e l s , these are the basic elements of a street system: freeways, a r t e r i e s , c o l l e c t o r s , feeders, - 3 0 -4 i ! I : 777 '! .A I 1 l 1 k ' FIGURE 1 2 . Hierarchy of streets: d i f f e r i n g street widths, lengths, configurations and t r a f f i c loads are a l l o t t e d to various c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s of streets. -31-secondary streets, and l o c a l streets Including loops, P-streets, eye-brows, and cul-de-sacs (see figure 12). Some types of streets have major and minor classes, and vary i n t r a f f i c volume demarcations. Street layout design also considers 1) intersections i n the develop-ment and those connecting to the ex i s t i n g c i t y f abric for safety and ease of flow. B a s i c a l l y , there are three and four-legged intersections with variations (T; T f l a r e d ; T with turning roads; Y; Y with turning roads; 4 le g ; 4 leg f l a r e d ; channelled, and so on (DeChiara). T i n t e r -sections are used where possible because they are safer as compared to crossed (4 legged) intersections; they provide fewer potentials for c o l l i s i o n s . 2) Turn arounds for cars and emergency vehicles must be provided on cul-de-sacs and i n the middle of long streets. COST REDUCTION) Shorter, fewer streets mean less material and lower construction costs. Concise street layout permits economical u t i l i t y design and i n s t a l l a t i o n . DELAY PREVENTION) The impacts of added t r a f f i c , noise, smell, and safety hazards must be studied, and addressed to calm delay inducing public resistance. Governmental agencies are concerned with these impacts as w e l l , and may require the street layout to f i t into a c i t y wide system. MARKETABILITY) Street patterns can be a sales feature. Cul-de-sacs, loops, P-streets, eyebrows and so on give a fee l i n g of being o f f the main road, suggest that the streets are safe for kids, and suggest there i s a separation of car and pedestrian (Norcross, 1966). See figures 13, and 15. -32-L O C A L 7r2Arnc, G ^ P A Q E A c e c ^ . 1 4 d ' + e » - 9 * 0 ' M . N « * . >^U.ecp(2- /SIR. UOCAI-^ o u - e c p p . ffefc -TVI^U6rl "TRAFFIC FIGURE 13. Various street widths and functions. -33-11:2 STREET DESIGN In a hierarchy of streets, various auto t r a f f i c volumes and speeds require d i f f e r e n t widths and lengths. Also, a driver unfamiliar with a development needs v i s u a l cues and labels i d e n t i f y i n g the street he i s on. Usually the developer and/or c i t y engineer require street design to be a constant width both on major t r a f f i c and minor t r a f f i c streets. This i s an unnecessary use of land, and a waste of materials. A constant width does not slow t r a f f i c . Further, constant widths remove a v i s u a l cue leaving the v i s i t o r confused, d r i v i n g round and round loop and c o l l e c t o r streets trying to f i n d his way to a major through street. The Urban Land I n s t i t u t e (ULI) publication, Innovation vs. Tradition  i n Community Development (Harmon), l i s t s possible street widths and r i g h t -of-ways (r/w) for various street functions. Thoroughfares: 50 mph, 80* r/w, 48' width. Collector: 40 mph, 70' r/w, 42* width. Minor street: 30 mph, 60' r/w, 36' width. A l l e y or lane: 20 mph, 30' r/w, 16' width. Notice the s i z e for a l l e y s and lanes. This would also be appropriate for cul-de-sacs, eyebrows, and some loop and P-streets. The Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t (GVRD), Qualitative Checklist for Compact  Housing, l i s t s s i m i l a r s p e c i f i c a t i o n s ; i t also notes that emergency access requires only a 12' wide sidewalk. Care must be taken to provide turn around space for delivery service, and emergency vehicles on cul-de-sacs, and on long streets. On a 50' r/w cul-de-sac (30-36' paved section) a 90' diameter turn around right-of-way should be provided (75' diameter paved) (DeChiara, p. 269). COST REDUCTION) Streets are a major consumer of land. Investigation shows that between 35% and 65% of the land i n a c i t y i s given over to street right-of-ways and parking. Narrower rights-of-way i n r e s i d e n t i c a l areas free more land for the dwelling unit and community f a c i l i t i e s , FIGURE 14. Negative buyer impact: no st r e e t , landscaping or walks a l l give poor f i r s t impression to the potential buyer/leaser regardless of the quality of the house unit. (Jerome, Idaho) FIGURE 15. Pos i t i v e buyer impact: note the finished land-scaping, walks, driveways, and units. Also note narrow winding street to reduce t r a f f i c and small banks of parking for v i s i t o r s (foreground). (Charbonneau, W i l s o n v i l l e , Oregon (Portland)). FIGURE 16. Clustered parking: a bank of parking immediately next to the dwelling units (Sharon Garden Apartments, Richmond, B.C.). FIGURE 17. Parking underneath the units (Ketchum, Idaho (Sun V a l l e y ) ) . -36-requires less material and fewer man hours to construct. DELAY PREVENTION) Streets with substantially increased t r a f f i c on exis t i n g r e s i d e n t i a l streets w i l l receive s t i f f public opposition. Design concessions to minimize, d i v e r t , and channel t r a f f i c w i l l appease neighbours. MARKETABILITY) A small narrow street i s a sales feature. Narrow width cul-de-sacs provide safety for the children, quiet for the residents, and project an intimate secure f e e l i n g (Norcross, 1966, p. 28). The Willows (see figure 39), a townhouse development i n Salt Lake County, Utah, takes advantage of narrow, short streets. The streets are 16 feet wide. They are g l o r i f i e d paved paths winding between rock outcroppings and trees. I t i s d i f f i c u l t to drive over 10 mph, and when two cars meet, both come to a near stop. The noises and hazards of the auto have been reduced, making the street system an important sales feature of the development. See figures 12, 14, and 15. 11:3 PARKING There are two simple general rules for parking l o t s . 1) Keep them as small as possible. Two smaller l o t s are easier to obscure than one large l o t . 2) Place them where they w i l l be convenient but not a dominant factor i n the l i v e s of the residents. They can be shielded with planted mounds up to 5 feet high; with masonry or wood walls and fences; with hedges; and by placing them underground (Link, p. 7). Underground parking however, i s more expensive to construct and to maintain ( l i g h t and ventilate) (Burrage). -37-FIGURE 18. A large parking area: i t i s obtrusive, impinges on the l i v i n g unit and can be a hazzard for pedestrians (Richmond, B.C.). FIGURE 19. Poor parking planning: impinges on the l i v i n g u nits, does not allow for pedestrians and could be a hazard i f a car crashed into one of the units', also the problems of noise and smell are not resolved. -38-A greater number of cars can be parked at 90° than at 60°, 45°, or 30°; however, the other angles establish a one way flow system and are easier to park In (Rubenstein). For parking space dimensions and design tables refer to Architectural Graphic Standards (Ramsey), design standard books, or most municipality parking ordinances. For v i s i t o r parking banks, some "small car only" s t a l l s may be included which can save about 15% i n area and materials per s t a l l (Jorgenson). Curb parking on narrow streets w i l l slow t r a f f i c but, i t i s not an economical use of valuable t r a v e l space (Burrage, p. 78). The average maximum walking distance from a parking area to the house unit should not exceed 100 feet (NSIBR standards for European housing l i s t s twice that distance). Parking i s a prime pedestrian/auto interface where the pedestrian becomes a driver and vice versa. The "two zones1 (pedestrian and parking) should not abut, but should in t e r l o c k . " (Alexander, 1963, p. 165) Drop off zones might be provided i f the parking cannot be placed next to the unit. There should be some covered access from the parking to the unit to protect from inclement weather, wind, or blazing sun, however, i f the parking area i s covered, a covered walk usually i s not needed (GVRD, 1975). COST REDUCTION) "Small car only" s t a l l s help reduce the cost of parking areaconstruction. DELAY PREVENTION) Parking - amount of spaces, shape, t r a f f i c flow, connection with streets, and landscaping - i s one important concern of governmental planners i n t h e i r s i t e review of a project. At public hearings, c i t i z e n s from the e x i s t i n g neighbourhood w i l l express strong concern on the issues of parking. -39-MARKETABILITY) Convenient parking and protected access are sales features p a r t i c u l a r l y for the home buyer. A housing project i n Focatello, Idaho, was designed by an architect for a l o c a l developer. Submitted to the c i t y for approval, the planning department rejected i t because of i n s u f f i c i e n t parking allowance. The architect had been ignorant of c i t y requirements for parking. The developer appealed to the Planning and Zoning Board, but was turned down. Next, the developer gave the project to an engineer. The engineer, conscious of the e a r l i e r problem with parking, l i t e r a l l y paved the entire s i t e . In agreement with the complaints of the neighbours as to the character of the new proposal, the Planning and Zoning Board again rejected the project. The developer has s t i l l not formulated another proposal. See figures 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 11:4 CAR PORTS AND GARAGES A covered parking area allows a m u l t i p l i c i t y of household a c t i v i t i e s . I t can provide support for a clothes l i n e or badminton net, make a sheltered hard surface play area when not occupied by an auto during most of the day, be the support and backboard for a b a s k e t f a l l hoop, and the roof can be used as a sun deck (GVRD, 1975). An enclosed garage provides extra secure storage space. A garage when site d between the street and the house unit may bound a private patio area, and often garages serve as a natural privacy buffer between adjacent units. A garage with access to the street i n the middle or rear of the l o t uses an excessive amount of paving material plus allows driveway parking which i s a safety problem with children playing i n the driveway (DeChiara; Jorgenson). A garage on the street or lane eliminates the driveway and the -40-FIGURE 20. Pedestrian entrance 'gate': provides v i s u a l separation between public and semi-public and i s a defensible space mechanism (Tatlow Court, Vancouver, B.C.). FIGURE 2 L Auto entrance gates: provides a f e e l i n g of security and i s a defensible space mechanism (Elkhorn, Sun Valley, Idaho). -41-safety hazard. To provide a garage for single-family detached and low-r i s e multi-family buildings costs about the same; however, to provide a garage i n a high-rise costs approximately 44% more per unit than i n a single-family or low-rise multi-family structure (Stone). COST REDUCTION) Garages and car ports located near the street or lane eliminates costly paving material for the driveways. DELAY PREVENTION) Inadequate or unsightly parking provisions can be one point of public and governmental planner resistance to a housing project. MARKETABILITY) A parking structure which provides extra storage space, safety, convenience, and extra bonuses such as sun deck, play area or help to form a private patio area i s a sales feature. The buyer/leaser receives multiple value for h i s investment (Seaton). See figures 15, 17, and 49. 11:5 DEVELOPMENT ENTRANCE The entrance(s) to a housing project l i n k auto, mass t r a n s i t , pedestrian and b i c y l c l e t r a f f i c to the ex i s t i n g f a b r i c of the c i t y . Linkage design should consider ease of flow and t r a f f i c safety. The development entrance projects an image to the v i s i t o r by being landscaped, having the name of the project and possible d e t a i l s such as a wal l or fence, fountains, l i g h t s , arches, or gates. The entrance area i s a defensible space mechanism (see IV:3 Security) defining the break between public and semi-public t e r r i t o r y (Newman). I t i s desirable to have an a f f e c t i v e l i m i t a t i o n on the access ways into a development. Some main entrances provide a security kiosk to prohibit the curious and -42-FIGURE 22. Entrance kiosk: security p a t r o l point to prevent vandals and the curious from d r i v i n g through. Note signs f o r dir e c t i o n and information (Lake Pines, Salt Lake County, Utah). FIGURE 23. Signs: of the same arch i t e c t u r a l s t y l e as the buildings, l i g h t i n g , and landscape, the signs are simple but give needed information and direction for the v i s i t o r (The Meadows, Ogden, Utah). -43-potential vandal from driving through. Other entrances may have an automatic gate activated by key or card. For the v i s i t o r , the entrance should also give information and di r e c t i o n . COST REDUCTION) Fewer development connections to the ex i s t i n g c i t y reduces construction costs. DELAY PREVENTION) Development linkages must s a t i s f y municipal planners or the plans w i l l be rejected u n t i l proper changes have been made. MARKETABILITY) The entrance which projects a pos i t i v e image can sway the p o t e n t i a l buyer/leaser. The fe e l i n g of security, and actual security with kiosks and e l e c t r i c gates have market a t t r a c t i o n . See figures 20, and 21. 1 1 : 6 GRAPHIC COMMUNICATION Signs provide information, give d i r e c t i o n , and project an image. They should be planned to be p l e n t i f u l and e a s i l y readable but avoid v i s u a l c l u t t e r and confusion. They should be located at a height and angle with r e f l e c t i v e paint and proper l i g h t i n g to be ea s i l y read at any time. Sign design w i l l vary depending on who w i l l read i t (Motorist, c y c l i s t , or pedestrian), and their speed. The importance of signs i n the project i s to give d i r e c t i o n and information (Claus). At the entrance, maps of the s i t e may be located to show the layout of the development. Street signs can have block numbers on them to help i n locating an address. The materials used, the design and landscaping of the signs add to the image of the development. -44-COST REDUCTION) Carefully designed signs and sign standards which serve several functions (Malt) can cut the cost of providing signs. DELAY PREVENTION) T r a f f i c signs, street signs, and, i n large projects, d i r e c t ion maps may be required i n a housing development. The planning and engineering departments w i l l reject the proposal u n t i l i t includes provisions for appropriate signage. MARKETABILITY) In the day-to-day l i v e s of the residents and v i s i t o r s , signs are an important, h i g h l y - v i s i b l e d e t a i l of the project. Graphics which set a mood and project a positive image of the development influence the buyer/leaser's f i n a l decision. See figures 22, and 23. 11:7 SITE DRAINAGE Sit e drainage i s an important factor i n housing developments. When developed, most of the s i t e i s covered with structures and pavement, leaving only a f r a c t i o n of the land to absorb the run-off water. Site run-off i s channelled onto the remaining open ground and into streams and gulleys. Storm sewers may be required to handle t h i s problem. Uncovered parking areas, driveways, pedestrian/cycle paths, patios, terraces, and streets must a l l be designed to drain freely and not to puddle. I f the s i t e has gulleys and ravines, catch basins are needed. The catch basin i s a green area most of the time, but when there i s run-off, i t c o l l e c t s the water and then slowly releases i t . They are provided to prevent erosion and to protect roadways and structures below the development (Lynch; Rubenstein). -45-F igure 2 4 . Catch b a s i n . -46-COST REDUCTION) E f f i c i e n t drainage design w i l l eliminate expensive "over" design and wasteful and unnecessary provisions for s i t e drainage. DELAY PREVENTION) Proper s i t e drainage i s a major checklist item for review by the municipality engineering s t a f f . Failure to address the problems of drainage w i l l cause delays u n t i l corrections are made. Endangered neighbours of the project w i l l offer s t i f f resistance at public hearings and i n the courts. MARKETABILITY) The catch basin green area can provide both views, and play areas which have sales a t t r a c t i o n for the potential buyer/leaser. See figures 22, and 39. 11:8 UTILITIES U t i l i t i e s are basic requirements of s i t e servicing. They include water, sewer, e l e c t r i c i t y , gas, telephone, and cable t e l e v i s i o n . Their design, l o c a t i o n , i n s t a l l a t i o n , ownership, and maintenance are concerns of the municipality, u t i l i t y companies, and the developer who i s responsible for t h e i r proper inclusi o n . While most u t i l i t y design i s straight-forward, and de t a i l s are standard, service boxes and metres should be planned for convenience without intruding on the appearance of the development (Hancock; Hayes, 1973). Coordination among the u t i l i t y companies and the developer's design team i s needed for proper design and i n s t a l l a t i o n of the u t i l i t i e s . The cost of installment and maintenance of u t i l i t i e s r i s e as density decreases (Stone). One goal i s to keep the li n e a r feet of u t i l i t i e s to a minimum and to put as many l i n e s as possible i n a common trench (Lynch). Underground u t i l i t i e s may be required by the municipality, and are e s t h e t i c a l l y pleasing because the c l u t t e r of l i n e s and poles i s - 4 7 -FIGURE 25. Poor u t i l i t y design: these entrances are clustered and unsightly because of improper design consultation and coordination with u t i l i t y companies. An otherwise successful project e l i c i t s a negative response from potential buyers at this point (Sharon Garden Apartments, Richmond, B.C.). FIGURE 26. Imaginative garbage receptacle: t h i s housing project uses super graphics and wood to incorporate the garbage bins into the design of the project, screen the bins and control smells and blowing refuse. (Beaverton, Oregon). -48-eliminated. COST REDUCTION) By clustering dwelling units and thus servicing higher (net) density developments, and by placing several u t i l i t y l i n e s i n one trench, the cost of s i t e servicing per unit drops rapidly (Stone; Whyte). DELAY PREVENTION) Coordination of design, l o c a t i o n , and i n s t a l l a t i o n of u t i l i t i e s i s necessary to prevent delays, s i t e plan revisions, and to eliminate obtrusive elements i n the b u i l t environment. MARKETABILITY) Unobtrusive u t i l i t i e s improve the esthetics of the project and influence the buyer/leaser's f i n a l decision. See figures 25, 34, and 59. 11:9 GARBAGE COLLECTION Refuse storage space should not be more than 50 feet from the dwelling unit, and should not be more than 10 feet from the service road used by the c o l l e c t i o n vehicle (NSIBR l i s t s European standards at over twice that much). Sanitation pick-up areas should harmonize with the s t y l e of the development, screen the storage from general view, prevent the spread of odours and the blowing of refuse, and be economic-a l l y easy to construct and use (Hayes, 1973). DELAY PREVENTION) Plans w i l l be rejected at the s i t e review stage i f there i s inadequate or unacceptable provisions for garbage storage space and c o l l e c t i o n . 4 MARKETABILITY) The convenience and esthetics of refuse storage areas i s an important sales feature. Unsightly or inconvenient refuse areas w i l l e l i c i t a negative reaction from a potential buyer/leaser. -49-See figure 26. 11:10 POSTAL SERVICE The Postal Service has a stake i n a development i n that i t has potential f i n a n c i a l impact on postal operations. The U.S. Postal Service asks to be contacted early i n the planning of the project to help improve postal service. They have a l i s t of 30 guidelines; among them are: 1) The developer must designate one o f f i c i a l to deal with the Postal Service. 2) The developer must give the Postal Service the following information: A) Master plan - geographical area, density, numbers of business units, road network, and timetable of s t a r t and completion. B) Amounts and location of schools, i n s t i t u t i o n s and u t i l i t i e s . 3) Agree early on a method of delivery - number of cluster boxes or curbside service, and make a commitment on cost of items, delivery time, etc. 4) Coordinate i n s t a l l a t i o n of the cluster boxes. 5) Agree early on modifications of cluster boxes and kiosk design to blend into the development (e.g. wood for a r u s t i c e f f e c t ) . 6) Agree early on who w i l l own the cluster boxes when the developer leaves the project. 7) Agree upon a street naming and numbering system for easy delivery (U.S. Postal Service). COST REDUCTION) Following postal service suggestions early w i l l prevent costly design changes l a t e r to accommodate postal delivery. DELAY PREVENTION) Early consultation and coordination to include postal service w i l l prevent expensive delays l a t e r while negotiations and design -50-changes are made to s a t i s f y the Postal Service. MARKETABILITY) Mail delivery areas that are convenient and a t t r a c t i v e add to the project's market a t t r a c t i o n . -51-CHAPTER I I I THE OPEN SPACE SYSTEM Open spaces and communal f a c i l i t i e s are s t i l l f a i r l y new i n housing developments (although they began with Howard c. 1890). Often talked of, yet seldom used, an open space system can add market value, i s an ef f e c t i v e mechanism for preserving important s i t e features, and can produce a superior l i v i n g environment. A successful well-used open space system i s not simple. I t needs to be expertly planned with care and d e t a i l . I t ' s prime value to the developer i s i n terms of buyer/leaser appeal. Inclusion of some open space features i n a housing project can reduce costs or help prevent delays. -52-111:1 OPEN SPACES The v i l l a g e green was a place for the w e l l , a place to meet, and a point of common defence from attack (McQuade). Some planners argue that today's green (open space) can be a r a l l y i n g point for culture, recreation, neighbourhood meetings, a place for contact with nature, and escape from the pressures of l i f e . The conventional house even with a large l o t can-not c o l l e c t i v e l y have a pool, tennis courts, playing f i e l d s , recreation rooms, b r i d l e paths, bike/pedestrian paths and so on. While a few homes w i l l have one or more items, everyone cannot afford a l l of them, but with common open spaces and f a c i l i t i e s , everyone can have and enjoy these amenities on a shared basis. "Failure to plan open spaces for a variety of uses i s a waste of land." (Katz, p. 134). Open spaces also provide nature contact and le i s u r e recreation at a scale which i s becoming impossible f o r the municipal government to provide. I t i s d i f f i c u l t for the c i t y to acquire a small piece of land, and costly to maintain i t . Such small parks have no direct relationship to the surrounding homes. An i n t e g r a l open space system flows among the dwelling units. Municipal governments best provide d i s t r i c t and regional parks (Pocatello, Idaho, 1974). Open space planning p r i n c i p l e s eliminate costly wasted space between buildings, and put i t to a more intense use. Every square inch of land i s precious, and v i t a l amounts of i t are wasted i n ugly useless spaces between buildings (Allsopp). Intense, multiple use of land increases i t ' s value and e f f i c i e n c y . The kind of space provided i s as important as the amount of space (Molen). Ron Molen argues that the quality of outdoor space i s determined by the number and variety of things to do. -53-FIGURE 27. E f f i c i e n t open space system: a spatious f e e l i n g with the use of e x i s t i n g trees and new landscaping and curving walks. Note the h i s t o r i c form house at right (Lake Pines, Salt Lake County, Utah). FIGURE 28. Extravagant open space: a too large open space becomes unused except for occasional f o o t b a l l . Large areas d r a s t i c a l l y reduce gross development density. An open fe e l i n g can be achieved with smaller amounts of land (see figure 27). Note mixed used of two story garden apartments and the highrise apartment tower for higher gross density. (Langara Gardens, Vancouver, B.C.). -54-COST REDUCTION) Open spaces are created by one of two ways. 1) Part of the s i t e i s not b u i l t on, and the units which would have been b u i l t there are added to the developed portion forming a higher net density. 2) The l o t s are reduced i n size and clustered, thus freeing areas of land around the l o t s . In either case, the project develops and services less land, and at a higher density, markedly reducing the cost of construction per l o t or unit (Stone; Whyte). DELAY PREVENTION) The developer may be required to provide an open space system for park area at a scale that i s uneconomical for the municipality to provide. That open space may be required to f i t into a c i t y wide green belt system. Failure to consider t h i s from the beginning of design can cause costly time delays to redesign the sub-d i v i s i o n . MARKETABILITY) Open space developments and th e i r f a c i l i t i e s give a d i s t i n c t market advantage. People when buying or renting a home (49%) f e l t the f a c i l i t i e s i n common were as important as the house i t s e l f (Norcross, 1966, p. 22). See figures 27, 28, 32, 34, 40, 44, and 59. 111:2 COMMUNITY CENTRE/RECREATIONAL FACILITIES The community centre and recreational f a c i l i t i e s of a housing project can be the hub of a c t i v i t y i n the development. While not necessarily i n the l i t e r a l centre of the development, the f a c i l i t i e s must be located i n a convenient place to be used by the residents. Consultation with the municipality and careful planning could produce a community centre which would serve the larger neighbourhood. Ron Molen has designed and b u i l t a number of housing developments i n the Salt Lake FIGURE 29. Community recreation f a c i l i t i e s : a swimming pool, meeting rooms, exercise rooms, etc. located next to several small shops and restaurants, and three story walk-ups at the centre of the housing project (The Meadows, Ogden, Utah). FIGURE 30. Cluster community center: a swimming pool, changing rooms, a meeting room and outdoor basketball court are provided for each cluster of 40 townhouses (Charbonneau, Wil s o n v i l l e , Oregon (Portland)). -56-region, and he l i s t s several f a c i l i t i e s which are economically viable and advisable i n a project (Molen, p. 200-201). These f a c i l i t i e s are for a project of 500 families on 100 acres. 1. Meeting room (a f l e x i b l e space for town meetings, theatre, r e c i t a l s , etc., including a kitchen and storage). 2. Reception and party room (includes a fi r e p l a c e and conversation p i t , plus good l i g h t i n g for art shows). 3. Games area and teen centre (includes b i l l i a r d s and ping pong). 4. Art centre including an art studio, ceramic k i l n and so on. 5. Wood shop. 6. Of f i c e , t o i l e t s , u t i l i t i e s , etc. 7. Indoor pool (20 x 40 fe e t ) . 8. Outdoor pool (30 x 80 fe e t ) . 9. Dressing room with sauna. 10. Exercise room with equipment. 11. Four tennis courts. 12. 20 acres of open space. 13. Landscaping and sprinkler system. 14. Four playgrounds. Other items also may be included. A. Experimental laboratory. B. Observ-atory. C. Greenhouse. D. Mechanics' centre. The s i z e of the project both i n land area and number of units, the economic l e v e l of the inhabitants and the nature of exi s t i n g community f a c i l i t i e s available w i l l strongly influence the design decision on type and s i z e of f a c i l i t i e s to include. The developer should also consider providing a t o o l shop and bike repair benches. A communal building might be provided for each cluster of 10 dwelling units. This space then could be used for storage, repair shop, meeting area or whatever as the families - 5 7 -FIGURE 31. A recycled mansion: this mansion i s the community f a c i l i t y and has several condominium suites. I t i s the f o c a l point of the project and t e s t i f i e s to the h i s t o r i c roots of the s i t e (Shannon Mews, Vancouver, B.C.). FIGURE 32. Reflecting pool: the old pool and landscaping has been retained again l i n k i n g the present to the past. Note the garden apartments step down with s i t e and achieve v i s u a l richness from the existing landscape (Shannon Mews, Vancouver, B.C.). -58-involved choose. Note three points concerning community f a c i l i t i e s . 1) F a c i l i t i e s not otherwise available i n the neighbourhood are more valuable to the residents. 2) A p l a y / s i t t i n g area for example for 12 families has greater value to each of the families than does a play/ s i t t i n g area for 20 to 50 families (Newman). 3) Care must be taken to invest ownership and control of the open spaces and common f a c i l i t i e s i n a homeowners association. Security of the f a c i l i t i e s may be a problem. Where more people are involved there i s greater vandalism and theft . Changing locks or lock combinations may be needed. Also the developer must educate the new residents and help the homeowners association to have a pos i t i v e and e f f e c t i v e s t a r t . DELAY PREVENTION) Correct l e g a l documents are needed to establish a homeowners association, by-laws, l e g a l rights and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , and s p e c i a l improvement d i s t r i c t status to protect the municipality, or there w i l l be delays by the c i t y for f i n a l approval and sales of the project (Vaughn). MARKETABILITY) Public acceptance and appeal of community and recreation f a c i l i t i e s are prime assets for the developer. Half of the people who are buying or renting stated that the common f a c i l i t i e s were as important i n the f i n a l decision as the house unit i t s e l f (Norcross, 1966). See figures 29, 30, and 31. -59-111:3 PLAY AREA "A well-equipped playground for boys and g i r l s of a l l ages, i n easy safe walking distance, i s needed. Next time i t should be planned as an essential part of the development." (Stein, p. 209) In one housing development (Easter H i l l , San Francisco) t r a d i t i o n a l play equipment i n a designated playground area i s provided; however, because of careful attention and handling of the t e r r a i n , courts, slopes and boulders, the entire project i s a playground. "At Easter H i l l the play equipment i s used as sort of intermission entertainment between games played among the rocks and on the slopes." (Williams, p. 51) The environmental q u a l i t y (diverse number of things to do and places to be) i s as important as expensive play equipment. A sandy area, a hard surface, a soft surface, f l a t and i n c l i n e d surfaces, with objects to climb on, around, over, swing on, and shape environments with, i s a l l that i s needed (GVRD, 1975). COST REDUCTION) Optimization of s i t e features such as rock out-croppings, ravines, etc., and the imaginative use of inexpensive items such as logs and ropes can be substituted for expensive playground equipment. DELAY PREVENTION) With the c i t y decreasing i t s involvement i n small parks, there i s a growing need for play areas provided i n the housing development. I f not provided i n i t i a l l y , there may be delays at the review stage u n t i l added (Pocatello). MARKETABILITY) The play area i s a sales feature i f the buyer/leaser i s i n the c h i l d rearing stages of the l i f e cycle (Foote), and sales value i n t e n s i f i e s i f there are no other f a c i l i t i e s close by. See figures 30 and 33. -60-FIGURE 33 . Play furniture: imaginative design which a r c h i t e c t u r a l l y blends with the project. (Village 2 , Salt Lake County, Utah). FIGURE 34. Curing walks: direct flow and create i n t e r e s t . Note the landscaping gives v i s u a l privacy for the uni t s . The door on the righ t i s a u t i l i t y access for meters, fans and easy serving and i s not v i s u a l l y unpleasing. See figure 25 (Three Fountains, Salt Lake County, Utah). -61-111:4 PEDESTRIAN PATHS When pedestrian paths are perfectly s t r a i g h t , they can become boring and r i g i d i n f e e l i n g , but when a path i s curved or s h i f t s i n d i r e c t i o n , a fee l i n g of l o c a l character and small f o c a l points are created (Vancouver). An angular walk, too, can create interest because of varying widths and sight l i n e s . The pedestrian path should be physically continuous with no barriers formed by autos and must have a reason to be provided. I t should l i n k open spaces with common walking destinations (GVRD, 1975). Protection from snow and i c e , r a i n , wind, hot sun, good drainage, views, and surface texture variations i n the walking experience must be considered. Pedestrian paths (sidewalks) may be required to p a r a l l e l both sides of the road with standard c i t y widths and design spe c i f i c a t i o n s . A boulevard may be used between the road and the sidewalk, or a side-walk may be provided on only one side of the street. I f a green belt system i s used, most pedestrian paths may be at the 'rear' of the dwelling units i n the open space system rather than along the roadway. To be used, the path must not be too long. For children: walking distance to schools i s an average of 1600 feet (8 minutes); walking to recreation i s an average of 800 feet (4 minutes); and walking to play i s an average of 400 feet (2 minutes). For the adult: walking to work i s an average of 400 feet; and walking to business or shopping i s an average of 300 feet (Bailey). COST REDUCTION) Paths which lead nowhere are a waste of time, money, space, energy, and materials. Careful design w i l l create i n t e r e s t i n g paths which have the potential to be w e l l used. -62-DELAY PREVENTION) Design provisions for the pedestrian i s one point of plan review by planning departments, and proposals which do not accommodate the pedestrian w i l l be rejected. MARKETABILITY) People enjoy walking i f i t i s provided f o r and i s pleasant. 50 to 75% of the residents walk more i n "open space" communities (Burchell). See figures 27, 34, 46, 58, and 59. 111:5 BICYCLE PATHS A man on a bicycle can go three or four times faster than the pedestrian, while using about one fourth the energy expended by the pedestrian. A bicycle uses l i t t l e space. Eighteen bikes can be parked i n the place of one car, and t h i r t y of them can move along i n the space devoured by a single automobile. In short, i t can be said that bicycles l e t people move with greater speed without taking up s i g n i f i c a n t amounts of scarce space, energy or time ( I l l i c h , 1974). With the energy c r i s i s , more lei s u r e time, and improved inexpensive models, the bicycle i s gaining popularity. In 1972, the f i r s t time since the introduction of the Model T Ford, Americans purchased more bicycles than autos - 12 m i l l i o n bikes (Breins). This i n t e n s i f i e s the demand for bike paths, and other safety measures to insure pleasurable bike r i d i n g . I t i s best to separate the bicycle from motor vehicles and pedestrians, but not always possible. There are three types of bike paths. 1) The bike path - i t i s a separated right of way for the exlusive use of bicycles. 2) The bike lane - a r e s t r i c t e d r i g h t of way for the semi-exclusive use of bicycles. This may be shared with either pedestrians or motor vehicles. 3) The bike route - a shared rig h t of way -63-<5 L64<<lr44 fUA6e<> P«0K*TP4AM4. FIGURE 35. Various bicycle paths. -64-with other modes of vehicle t r a f f i c . This i s a street which i s c l e a r l y marked and designated for use both by autos and bicycles. I f one design feature of the project i s b i c y c l e paths, places to store and safely secure the bike are complimenting design features. The house unit can provide storage space i n the u t i l i t y area, the garage, a large closet, or hanging space on a w a l l . Exterior sheds might be provided for storage, or a communal shed shared by about 10 families and having provisions for bike repair benches might be included i n the design. At recreational and community f a c i l i t i e s , bikers require a place to lock th e i r bikes. COST REDUCTION) Provisions for bicycle use and storage may reduce customer demand and c i t y requirement for two or more car space provisions thus cutting construction costs. DELAY PREVENTION) Many c i t i e s are requiring the inclusion of bike paths, lanes, or routes as part of the platted subdivision. Failure to include provisions for the bike can cause delays at the s i t e review stage. MARKETABILITY) Because of increasing popularity of the bi c y c l e , the inclusi o n of bike paths i s another sales feature of the housing develop-ment. Storage i n or near the dwelling u n i t , and places to lock bicycles at community areas i n the development complement bike paths as sales features. In addition, the extra storage space i s a bonus for the buyer/ leaser i f i t i s not used for bicycles. A standard housing subdivision i n Pocatello, Idaho, which should have received routine acceptance, was delayed two months by planning o f f i c i a l s u n t i l the developer included a bike path which f i t t e d into the c i t y wide system. See figure 35. r T T • MAINTAIN pEpg f^WAM f>Atn LEVEL TeKfJUe 4i-osws T R A F F I C A M D ALem T«6 pep^-jwAM/CKaKj FIGURE 36. Safe intersections. -66-111:6 INTERSECTION OF CIRCULATION MODES Where pedestrian and bicycle paths intersect with vehicular streets, careful detailed design i s needed to insure pedestrian/biker safety and comfort. I f possible the two should be separated with under and over-passes (Molen; Stein; Vancouver). I f cross-walks are used, special markings, l i g h t i n g , and surface levels and treatments w i l l give the pedestrian/biker the advantage over the auto. The road surface may narrow or jog at the point of crossing, and the path should be kept l e v e l and the street raised to i t s l e v e l . I f path l e v e l i s not maintained, cuts i n the curb must be provided for bikes, wheelchairs, prams, and grocery carts. The pedestrian path texture should be maintained throughout the inte r s e c t i o n , and noise generating texture such as brick can be used on the street for about 60 feet of either side of the crossing (Vancouver). Noise generating material, narrow street width at the intersection, and movable planters i n the street a l l help to slow t r a f f i c . DELAY PREVENTION) Street safety i s another point of s i t e review by governmental planners, and i s a common concern of neighbours at public hearings. MARKETABILITY) Safety i s important to a l l home buyers and renters. Safe, convenient cross-walks for pedestrians and bikers i s a sales feature adding to the general appeal of the project. See figure 36. -67-UWt IK A U u ( IT TAKBS Mo. Utc,HT frr4t*M T U B PATH*). TWi<> piATUfce. tLLU^ifttAifB TUB pAJ>*. FIGURE 37. Development l i g h t i n g : proper design and location can add interest to pedestrian paths, use less energy, and harmonize with the development s t y l e . -68-111:7 DEVELOPMENT LIGHTING Outdoor l i g h t i n g illuminates walkways, roads, and entry ways, and provides a dramatic effect when used i n conjunction with other s i t e features such as pools/fountains, sculptures, plantings, and special walls (Rubenstein). The design of the f i x t u r e should be of a s t y l e consistent with the character of the development, must be e f f i c i e n t -do the job without waste, be vandal proof, and easy to service. The use of standard street l i g h t i n g does not enhance l o c a l character. Use l o c a l (incandescent) l i g h t i n g which recognizes f o c a l points and the 'wandering' q u a l i t i e s of the street (Vancouver). COST REDUCTION) Accurate l i g h t i n g design w i l l eliminate overlighting and reduce the costs of l i g h t i n g provision. DELAY PREVENTION) Lighting of public areas i s one concern of municipal engineering departments, and i f the plans are inadequate, they w i l l be rejected for changes. MARKETABILITY) E f f i c i e n t , a t t r a c t i v e l i g h t i n g appeals to the buyer's desire f o r security and enhances the pedestrian/bike paths. See figures 37 and 38. 111:8 WATER Pools are popular attractions i n a housing development. A lake i s the most popular recreation f a c i l i t y , and i s a low-cost, low-maintenance open space feature. I t i s a unifying element of the design (Rubenstein). Surface water (lakes, streams and ponds) where possible should be used i n conjunction with p r e v a i l i n g winds as a conditioner and modifier of temperatures for the house unit (Leckie). -69-FIGURE 38. A pond: dwelling units are s i t e d on an old pond which provides an a t t r a c t i v e , low cost, low maintenance open space. (Lake Pines, Salt Lake County, Utah). FIGURE 39. A stream: this high density town house configuration (21 units/acrea) has an expansive open fee l i n g because of the stream - a low cost, low maintenance open space. (The Willows, Salt Lake County, Utah). FIGURE 40. An a r t i f i c a l pond: this r e f l e c t i n g pool adds charm and dimension to the landscape and can help modify the climate. (Shannon Mews, Vancouver, B.C.). FIGURE 41. An a r t i f i c i a l stream: a man-made system of streams, fountains, w a t e r f a l l s , and pools unify the design, add dimension and are dramatic f o c a l points of the landscape; and are an important sales feature of the project (Osterly Park, Richmond, B.C.). -71-COST REDUCTION) Water bodies need l i t t l e preparation or maintenance, thus reducing the cost of providing open spaces. DELAY PREVENTION) The handling of natural s i t e water features i s a concern of planning departments as i t relates to public safety and i s a concern of environmental groups i n terms of ecological protection. MARKETABILITY) Site water bodies are popular sales features as noted by Norcross (1966) and Rubenstein. A PUD i n Lake Barrington Shores, I l l i n o i s , (Gerardi) preserved the lake, used the number of housing units which could have been placed there i f the lake were drained, elsewhere on the s i t e (higher net density) and used the lake as the major open space and foc a l point of the develop-ment. The development i s estimated to give a tax surplus of over $1 m i l l i o n a year to the c i t y as opposed to the $400,000 to $500,000 d e f i c i t a subdivision b u i l t under the o r i g i n a l zoning would have produced. See figures 32, 38, 39, 40, and 41. 111:9 PLANT MATERIAL As noted e a r l i e r i n Chapter I "The S i t e " , e x i s t i n g vegetation on the s i t e can be a useful resource. Combined with new vegetation, the land-scaping i s an important element i n the appearance of the development, and i t s attractiveness to the buyer/leaser (Molen). Plants constantly undergo changes - growth and seasonal foliage/berry colour changes. They provide shade, reduce glare, and i n a dense configuration are eff e c t i v e windbreaks. Plants have a cooling effect i n the summer by using heat for evapotrans-p i r a t i o n a l process i n t h e i r f o l i a g e , and plant material reduces the albedo ( r e f l e c t i v i t y ) of the land surface, thereby reducing the possible heat gain of the dwelling unit. Dense growth absorbs sound, enhances privacy, and i s -72-£*5£Vy\BD LAr4D * V B ^ C T A T I ^ M fllS[^ AHD D i m i ^ B . FIGURE 42. Advantages of berms and dense fo l i a g e . -73-a remarkably e f f i c i e n t a i r f i l t e r for dust and other p a r t i c l e s . Vegetation generally looks nice and often smells better. I t also can support an animal population (Leckie). Selection of plants and their location with respect to other plants, and soil/slope/drainage features are c r u c i a l ' f o r t h e i r healthy s u r v i v a l . Not a l l plants w i l l survive i n a l l climates. Some plants require sun or shade, good or poor drainage, and different s o i l mixtures and compositions. A landscape architect consultant i s needed to insure correct economical selection and s i t i n g of plants. COST REDUCTION) The use of plant material along with proper unit design and orientation w i l l allow the elimination of a i r conditioning units and thus reduce construction costs (Clegg; Molen; Mumford). DELAY PREVENTION) PUD's, multi-family projects, and parking l o t s usually are required by l o c a l zoning to be landscaped. Failure to include landscaping i n the project proposal can cause delays at the plan review and approval stages. MARKETABILITY) Vegetation i s a sales feature. I t enhances the appearance of the dwelling unit, and screens and modifies the environment providing bonuses which appeal to the buyer/leaser. In C a l i f o r n i a , the medians of divided highways are planted with a narium dense-growing flowering bush known as/\orleander , which provides f l o r a l delight, prevents accidental crossing of the median, shields on-coming headlights at night, and requires l i t t l e or no maintenance. See figures 27, 28, 31, 32, 34, 39, 42, and 52. -74-CHAPTER IV THE DWELLING UNIT The house form, s t y l e , tenure, orientation, relationship to adjoining units, and i t s context and s i t e arrangement are a l l important decisions to be made by the developer along with his design team. The dwelling unit design and layout are central to the success of the project. Be i t a t o o l , a machine, or an environment for l i v i n g , the dwelling unit i s an i n t r i c a t e and complex subject. -75-- 1 1 1 i i 1 ^ 1 • 1 1 i i H 3. 4rVSAU-£j2. LOrfS ftlLoui p(lEi6»4/e — 1 n W ! n l i f ~ •" .1. — ' C P " to 1 4. <MAU.ee- u>Ti> c^auupED A W U U D AH mjiMArps cue- oe- <&A>C. Figure 43. Various stages and types of clustering. -76-IV:1 CLUSTER CONCEPT The concept of clustering i s to group the dwelling units or building l o t s into a smaller area to achieve higher net densities, shorter and fewer roads, u t i l i t y l i n e s , etc., and to take land out of development to be used as open spaces. Two clustering techniques are used: 1) Reduce l o t size and group them together—usually around a cul-de-sac or other minor street. 2) Use the gross s i t e density, but group the units i n a multi-family configuration thus creating a higher developed (net) density. Clustering creates higher net density and frees land for green b e l t s , open spaces, common f a c i l i t i e s and land preserves, but i t must not be used as a device to achieve higher densities without providing open spaces. "Clustering offers unparalleled advantages for imaginative use of the topography." (Whyte, p. 14 ) I t i s a concept for working with the s i t e , and for i n t e r j e c t i n g imagination into the s i t e plan. COST REDUCTION) More families on the developed area of the s i t e (higher net density) conotes lower cost for each unit which means per land area, less tax for each household unit. By clustering, the cost to the developer for construction and the cost to the c i t y for services per dwelling unit i s greatly reduced (Harmon). On a r o l l i n g or h i l l y s i t e , clustering on the contours w i l l reduce construction costs for drainage; reduce s i t e clearing costs by an average of $250-$750 per acre; and cut landscaping costs by $300-$500 per unit (Rahenkamp). DELAY PREVENTION) Clustering to preserve an important s i t e feature or process, or w i l d l i f e habitat w i l l prevent environmentalists taking l e g a l action against the development. FIGURE 44. Row house and multi-story unit clustering: townhouses and medium-rise apartment block cluster dwelling units to free land for open spaces (Arbutus V i l l a g e , Vancouver, B.C.). FIGURE 45. Zero Lot Line Concept: single family units are clustered around a hammer head cul-de-sac, and two conventional cul-de-sacs. Useless side yards are eliminated and each unit has a south and west patio. (The Highlander, P.U.D.). -78-MARKETABILITY) There are three attractions gained from clustering. 1) The open green spaces created by clustering have market value. 2) The gree spaces are not personally maintained by the buyer/leaser and thus i s a low maintenance att r a c t i o n . 3) The money saved by clustering can be passed onto the buyer/leaser through lower dwelling unit price. Following i s an example from Cluster Development (Whyte) showing the economic advantages of clustering. The V i l l a g e Green development, Hillsborough, New Jersey, was planned as a conventional subdivision of one acre l o t s , but was changed to have three clusters of smaller l o t s . Clustering added three more house l o t s ; allowed the use of choice land only; and buffered the development from undesirable surrounding area. The results were: a reduction i n l o t development cost from $6,500 to $5,500, reduction of u t i l i t y costs by 45%, and improved e f f i c i e n c y of the use of men and materials by building one cluster at a time. See figures 38, 43, 44, 45, and 59. IV:2 BUILDING HEIGHT When the developer decides to b u i l d multiple family units, the questions of building form, height, and density are important. Zoning ordinances often l i m i t the height and density, and land costs often require multiple s t o r i e s . The developer's dilemma can be eased by understanding the potentials and l i a b i l i t i e s of various height/ density decisions. Definitions are: A low-rise building i s a structure without an elevator. This can be 1, 2, or 3 s t o r i e s . A medium-rise building i s a structure with an elevator and 4, 5, 6, or 7 sto r i e s high. A high-rise building i s a structure over 7 s t o r i e s . -79-There are diverse l i m i t a t i o n s to the height of a building. Structural l i m i t a t i o n i s one factor; another i s that over 86 s t o r i e s , the space used up by elevators to service the f l o o r s exceeds the amount of rentable f l o o r space making i t uneconomical (Raskin). Thirdly, different building heights cost more to bu i l d and maintain. A building up to f i v e stories costs about 12% more per unit, and a t y p i c a l high-rise of 10-13 stories costs about 2/3 more to construct per unit than a single-family house. Any elevatored building has a marked increase i n maintenance and management costs (Stone, p. 245). Such costs for buildings over 5 stories are about 2/3 more than single-family dwellings. I t i s often argued that high land costs require high density which means high-rise buildings. Pruitt-Igoe was a t y p i c a l complex of f i f t e e n story apartment blocks at 50 units/acre, yet, North Beach Place, San Francisco, a development of three story walk-ups, achieves 50 units/acre with a low crime rate and high resident s a t i s f a c t i o n (Newman, p. 137). Under favorable conditions, a 3 story building can achieve the same density as a high-rise tower; however, such densities can be maintained over only l i m i t e d areas of development. At some point streets, pedestrian and bike paths, open spaces, and community f a c i l i t i e s must be provided thus creating a lower gross density. Apartment towers can be mixed with low-rise buildings i f needed to a t t a i n higher densities ( B e l l ; Mason; Newman). Apartment towers are becoming an unpopular family housing form both with neighbours and tenants. The 1968 Federal Housing Act issued guidelines that families with children could not be housed i n high-rise buildings unless other options were unavailable. The apartment tower i s one housing solution for singles, el d e r l y , students, and the newly -80-married. The well-to-do family - who can afford doormen, elevator attendants, parking security p a t r o l s , and the service s t a f f necessary to keep a high-rise building secure and w e l l maintained - also f i n d t h i s an acceptable solution. COST REDUCTION) Medium and high-rise buildings are expensive to construct, and with new f i r e and safety codes being adopted are becoming even more expensive. When higher densities are desired th n attainable with single-family and compact (GVRD, 1975) housing, the design proposal must balance increased density with increased construction costs. Often i t w i l l be found low and medium-rise buildings can produce the desired density without increased construction cost, or may be mixed with apartment towers. In addition as noted above low and medium-rise buildings may produce the needed number of units on a piece of land and s t i l l keep construction costs per unit lower than with a high-rise building. DELAY PREVENTION) Municipal planners when reviewing higher density forms of housing w i l l consider: impact on streets, parking, and mass t r a n s i t ; impact on schools, community centres, and l o c a l businesses; curtailment of views and v i s t a s ; impact on the skyline; shadowing of sunlight, and reduction of skylighting; f u n e l l i n g of winds; and the buildings provisions for communal f a c i l i t i e s recreation, indoor/outdoor linkages and relationships, security (Defensible Space; Newman) mechanisms, and opportunities for intense use of remaining open lands on the s i t e . For more detailed inform-ation on these concerns consult l o c a l zoning ordinances and planning department project review and approval brochures, and refer to books by Clegg; DeChiara; Prenis; and Ramsey. -81-FIGURE 46. Intimate walk: a pleasant walk weaves among the units forming a pedestrian street. This i s a semi-public area, and the fences and landscape mark semi-private areas (Sharon Garden Apartments, Richmond, B.C.). FIGURE 47. Gate to semi-private area: second and t h i r d story walks above public path form a gate and define a semi-private area of a condominium housing cluster (Elkhorn at Sun Valley, Idaho). -82-MARKETABILITY) Low and medium-rise buildings i n older r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhoods may receive greater public acceptance than high-rise buildings when the buyer/leaser i s searching for a residence. IV:3 SECURITY Pioneering work on design as a security mechanism i n housing i s Defensible Space by Oscar Newman. The s t a r t i n g point of his argument for security i s that the community must fi g h t crime, not the i n d i v i d u a l . One factor that enables the community to combat crime i s design. Design for security uses four t a c t i c s to create v i s i b i l i t y and proximity control or what Newman c a l l s defensible space. 1. Create t e r r i t o r i a l d e f i n i t i o n of space i n the development r e f l e c t i n g areas of influence by inhabitants - i n other words, subdivide the r e s i d e n t i a l area into zones of influence. 2. Position windows to allow residents to naturally survey exterior and i n t e r i o r public spaces. 3. Avoid building forms and idioms which suggest to others the v u l n e r a b i l i t y and i s o l a t i o n of the inhabitants. 4. Enhance safety by locating the development close to a c t i v i t y areas that do not provide continued threat. E s s e n t i a l l y , defensible space allows the residents to distinguish neighbours from intruders. The security of a housing project i s enhanced by: 1) street a c t i v i t y ; 2) the entrance on the street instead of the i n t e r i o r court; 3) a unit r e l a t i o n and association to the play and recreation areas: 4) unit surveillance of the area. -83-DELAY PREVENTION) Some large c i t i e s such as New York are beginning to use defensible space p r i n c i p l e s i n the review of housing projects (Bamett). Newman's book and i t ' s . p r i n c i p l e s are f a m i l i a r to most planners i n municipal governments and can be one of th e i r concerns i n the project review. MARKETABILITY) Security for the buyer/leaser i s a prime concern (Cooper, 1975) and thus defensible space planning and design pri n c i p l e s are sales features of the project. See figures 20, 21, 46, and 47. IV:4 UNIT RELATIONSHIPS Care must be taken i n the planning and design of the house unit as i t relates to the s i t e and the other structures surrounding i t . Relationship considerations include v i s u a l and aural privacy, orientation and building s i t i n g for adequate sunlight and a i r , orientation for views, protection from winds and storms, and so on to prevent a building and i t ' s inhabitants from inpinging on the residents of another building. The single-family house tends to receive no attention i n these areas. I t i s i s o l a t e d on a l l four sides and therefore i s considered to have a l l the sunlight, a i r , and v i s u a l and aural privacy i t needs. However, th i s i s usually not the case. Design for orientation, landscaping and so on are needed to correct t h i s problem (Link). As l o t s become smaller and units are attached, unit relationships become more c r i t i c a l . There are two key words to consider i n unit relationships -privacy (both v i s u a l and aural) and sunlight. Privacy i s a basic necessity i n a l l housing, especially higher density forms (Hayes, 1972). -84-FIGURE 48. Cramped s i t i n g : although not a high density design (about 7 units/net acre), outdoor spaces lack privacy. Fences, landscaping and berms could remedy t h i s in part; different siting of the units would be best. (Wendell, Idaho) FIGURE 49. Spacious private outdoor space: t h i s high density townhouse design (21 units/acre) achieves a private outdoor space between duplex garage units on l e f t and the dwelling units at r i g h t . (The Pinery, Denver, Colorado). -85-Visual privacy orients buildings and provides landscaping so that people i n one unit do not look d i r e c t l y into another unit through the windows; that windows near active communal or public areas are screened (Cooper, 1975); and that other units do not overlook private outdoor spaces. As walls and f l o o r / c e i l i n g s are shared, the need for aural privacy becomes acute. Structural, plumbing, and e l e c t r i c a l i n s u l a t i o n can cut sound transmission through walls and c e i l i n g s . Design can reduce the amount of common w a l l that townhouses and attached single-family units share. The amount of separation from neighbours i s one measure of the quality of privacy (Michelson, p. 100). Sunlight angle minimums insure adequate natural l i g h t i n g and v e n t i l a t i o n . Refer to l o c a l municipal zoning ordinances for s p e c i f i c design c r i t e r i a for various b u i l d i n g forms and heights, or DeChiara, Manual of Housing/Planning and  Design C r i t e r i a . DELAY PREVENTION) At the plan review stage, multiple family, town-house, attached single-family and garden or patio designs w i l l be rejected u n t i l adequate provision i s made for natural l i g h t i n g and ve n t i l a t i o n according to l o c a l municipal zoning ordinances. MARKETABILITY) Careful design which provides maximum v i s u a l and aural privacy, sunlighting and so fo r t h , i s a strong sales feature. Osterly Park, Richmond, B.C., a housing development of attached single-family units, used two attached units as a sales model. A passage way was cut between the adjoining livingroom areas to show the extra heavy staggered stud walls and in s u l a t i o n for maximum sound proofing. The sound proofing d e t a i l s and unit design such as u t i l i t y , stairways, and closets on adjoining common walls to reduce noise -86-Figure 50. Unit relationships. -87-transmission. See figure 50 IV:5 UNIT DESIGN - TRANSITION SPACE An i n i t i a l concern i n the dwelling unit design i s the p r i n c i p l e of defensible space. The t r a n s i t i o n spaces move the in d i v i d u a l from public community, to public neighbourhood, to semi-public, onto semi-private, to private f a m i l i a l , and to private i n d i v i d u a l . Some of the zones may be missing or overlapping. The clear d e f i n i t i o n of s o c i a l t e r r i t o r y requires clear strong physical and symbolic expressions. "Give each doorway and entrance space a strong t r a n s i t i o n by providing: 1) a courtyard or porches or alcoves with seats; 2) 'gates'; 3) changes i n l e v e l ; 4) changes i n d i r e c t i o n , l i g h t i n g , etc.; 5) amenities such as s i t t i n g areas, play areas, work areas, etc. incorporated as v i s u a l l y part of the entry space." (Vancouver) The semi-public space corresponds to the 'front lawn'. Residents should be able to landscape or plant a garden i n th i s area. The semi-private corresponds to the 'front porch', and has several s o c i a l and environmental uses. I t i s a place for the family and neighbours to gather, a place to view the public while remaining aloof, and i t i s a place for sunshine, natural cooling and protection from winds and pr e c i p i t a t i o n . The front lawn and porch have an ingrained symbology i n western society of t e r r i t o r y , of being private and protected, and ultimately a symbol of s e l f (Cooper, 1974, p. 134-135). DELAY PREVENTION) As i s shown by the c i t y of Vancouver and the c i t y of Pocatello (Mason), c i t i e s are beginning to use the de t a i l s of design such as t r a n s i t i o n spaces as a point of consideration i n the review of -88-housing projects. MARKETABILITY) As a security mechanism, an amenity of s o c i a l order, a natural modifier of climate, and symbol of s e l f , the t r a n s i t i o n spaces are important sales features. See figures 20, 46, 47. IV:6 UNIT ENTRANCE The unit entrance relates to defensible space, and to the s o c i a l i n teraction of residents (Gans). In multiple family designs, the entrance requires careful attention. A common entrance i s one threat to privacy (Morris), so the fewer the users of a common entrance i n a garden apartment or walk-up creates f a m i l i a r i t y with neighbours and exposes strangers (Newman). MARKETABILITY) Security, plus the amenity of a private or nearly private entrance i s a sales feature. The in d i v i d u a l unit has greater importance and privacy (Cooper, 1975, p. 225). See figures 25, 48, and 49. IV:7 UNIT DESIGN - LAYOUT The unit design i s specialized, varies with area, market preference, and family cycle stage. For privacy i n the unit, Alexander and Chermayeff have s i x questions (p. 218-219). 1) Is there an entry lock to the unit? 2) Is there a buffer between the parents' and childrens' sleeping areas? 3) Is there a separate children's access? 4) Is there a lock to the parent's rooms? 5) Can the livingroom be isolated? 6) Are the household outdoor spaces private? To provide these s i x - 8 9 -FIGURE 51. Six points of privacy i n the dwelling u n i t : Alexander and Chermayeffs dwelling unit design features for privacy. -90-elements conotes a large house; however, a small unit can u t i l i z e the same p r i n c i p l e s . Ron Molen l i s t s (on p. 199) his requirements for the private t e r r i t o r y (house and yard). 1) Secure spaces and warm rest - a f i r e -place and conversation p i t ; a place to dine; a place for family r i t u a l ; an outside f i r e p i t . 2) Exciting spaces - an atrium; a two-story space; a crow's nest; outside decks. 3) Learning and c r e a t i v i t y -a studio; a music area; a l i b r a r y ; a workbench; a creative play area outside; a vegetable garden. 4) Esthetic - a gallery w a l l ; a stereo area; a l i b r a r y ; natural landscaping. 5) S p i r i t u a l - a place to be alone to contemplate; a sacred niche. 6) A t h l e t i c - a v i t a l play space; a place to exercise; a place to be free and uninhibited. 7) Rest and other physical needs - a place to relax; physical and accoustical i s o l a t i o n . The preceding l i s t requires multi-purposive design i n the unit (Seaton). Most sources (Alexander; CMHC; NSIBR; Link; Molen) l i s t these areas as needed for a house unit: active l i v i n g ; quiet l i v i n g ; food preparation; food consumption; u t i l i t y ; hygiene; and sleeping spaces. M i t c h e l l and Pitman l i s t and i l l u s t r a t e many house features the buyer i s looking f o r . Among them are: plenty of bedrooms, storage space, usable plan, buffers between bedrooms such as closets or washrooms, entrance way separate from the livingroom, a family room, v i s u a l supervision of play areas from the kitchen, and no heavy t r a f f i c patterns. COST REDUCTION) Careful imaginative design w i l l produce multi-purposive spaces which w i l l accommodate several a c t i v i t i e s . I f a room i s provided for each activity,- costs would be high, so as square footage i s reduced, but space f l e x i b i l i t y i s retained to accommodate -91-various household a c t i v i t i e s , construction costs are reduced. DELAY PREVENTION) Different governmental agencies have s p e c i f i c room size requirements. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Housing and Urban Development, Federal Housing Association, p r o v i n c i a l and state health and f i r e codes, municipal zoning ordinances, and building codes have room size minimums which must be met before the developer can receive financing, insurance, health c e r t i f i c a t e , or plan approval. MARKETABILITY) The space i n the unit, the number of people and a c t i v i t i e s i t w i l l accommodate, u t i l i t y of the spaces, and v i s u a l and accoustical privacy are central concerns of the pot e n t i a l buyer/ leaser ( M i t c h e l l ) . See figure 51. IV:8 DESIGN FOR THE HANDICAPPED Design guides and building codes for the handicapped l i s t three degrees of d i s a b i l i t y - l i g h t , moderate and severe. Light and moderate -cain, crutches, or wheelchair - handicapped persons can expect the same range of housing types, forms and o p p o r t u n i t i e s as people without d i s a b i l i t i e s . For the severely handicapped who require constant or regular care and special equipment, housing types are lim i t e d or non-existant. There are detailed specifications for every aspect of the house unit - access, c i r c u l a t i o n , room s i z e s , various counter heights, location of assistance bars and so on - such as i n Designing for the  Disabled (Goldsmith), and Housing the Handicapped (Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation). -92-Following are some general points to remember: 1) Access - 3*0" wide doors minimum; small thresholds, lever door handles where possible; and ramps not s t a i r s , and landings at doorways. 2) C i r c u l a t i o n -3'0" minimum h a l l widths with a 5' square area at doors for opening and manoeuvring. 3) Allow room to manoeuvre around furniture. 4) Provide room to manoeuvre and to store a wheelchair i n the bathroom. 5) Allow room to store or 'park' a wheelchair. DELAY PREVENTION) New uniform building codes require provision for the handicapped at least i n public areas. Failure to do so i n the community f a c i l i t i e s w i l l cause delays at the plan review stage. MARKETABILITY) To provide housing for disabled persons w i l l control a segment of the housing market often ignored by most developers. Also the space for manoeuvrability and storage i s a bonus which appeals to a l l buyer/leasers. IV: 9 STORAGE Storage seems to be one item the household always wishes there was more of. Convenient, spacious storage i s looked for i n a l l rooms (Link). CMHC recommends provision of storage space for clothing, outdoor clothing, seasonal clothing, l i n e n , hobbies, toys, sports material, cleaning equipment, storm windows and screens, luggage, household to o l s , garden tools, outdoor furniture, bicycles and baby carriages, preserves, dead storage, plus food and cleaning supplies. Storage spaces such as closets are important buffers between bedrooms and between quiet and active parts of the house (M i t c h e l l ) . -93-FIGURE 52. Outdoor l i g h t i n g : blends with the a r c h i t e c t u r a l design, carries the design theme, and enhances the landscape. Note the planted berm screening a cluster of v i s i t o r parking spaces. (Osterly Park, Richmond, B.C.). FIGURE 53. Indoor l i g h t i n g : custom designed units and s p e c i f i c l i g h t i n g . (Village 2, Salt Lake County, Utah). COST REDUCTION) Careful design w i l l provide ample storage without increasing unit s i z e and thus keeping construction costs down. DEALY PREVENTION) Some federal p r o v i n c i a l and state, and municipal agencies require minimums of storage space i n the dwelling unit be provided before financing or plan approval can be made. MARKETABILITY) Usable, imaginative, generous storage i n the unit i s a strong sales feature. IV:10 INTERIOR LIGHTING Lighting design w i l l add to the attractiveness of the unit and reduce the developers' expenses. The f i r s t tendency i s to overlight (Leckie). The requirements of human need and the pa r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t y must be the determinant i n l i g h t i n g design rather than standard configurations (Hayward). There should not be more than 30 to 35 footcandles; further l i g h t i n t e n s i t y i s apt to cause v i s u a l d i s t r a c t i o n . W. Lan i n Other Homes and Garbage (Leckie) states that once the 10 to 15 footcandle l e v e l has been achieved, task v i s i b i l i t y can be improved far more e a s i l y through quality changes rather than by adding quantity. We see by the balance of l i g h t more than by the quantity. Secondly, there should be a greater use of natural l i g h t i n g with s p e c i f i c l i g h t i n g instead of general l i g h t l e v els of a r t i f i c i a l source. "Variation i n experience i s the normal condition of human behavior." (Hayward, p. 126) Thirdly, custom designed and b u i l t (by the contractor) f i x t u r e s are less expensive than many conventional or standard f i x t u r e s , and add to the attractiveness of the design. Figure 54. Fireplace design. -96-COST REDUCTION) Substituting daylight for a r t i f i c i a l l i g h t i n g , using s p e c i f i c l i g h t i n g instead of general l i g h t i n g , lowering the number of footcandles, and custom designing and building f i x t u r e s , a l l reduce the developer's expense (Clegg; G r i f f i n ; Hancock; Leckie; Molen). DELAY PREVENTION) Lighting specifications must meet building code requirements to receive approval from municipal bu i l d i n g inspectors. MARKETABILITY) Attention to l i g h t i n g d e t a i l s , and i n d i v i d u a l l y designed f i x t u r e s and distinctiveness to the unit e l i c i t i n g p o s i t i v e sales appeal. * For one project, an architect i n Pocatello, Idaho, designed s p e c i f i c l i g h t i n g with custom b u i l t f i x t u r e s . The design used fewer l i g h t s (about 10%), and the custom b u i l t f i x t u r e s cost 25 to 35% less to construct than the purchase price of conventional f i x t u r e s . See figure 53. IV:11 FIREPLACE DESIGN The f i r e p l a c e i s a source of l i g h t . I t provides a r e s t f u l soft glow which draws people l i k e a magnet. I t i s a source of heat that one can use for cooking - fun or informal - or for emergency heating and cooking. I t i s also a source of heat to augment the central heating and help reduce u t i l i t y b i l l s . The f i r e p l a c e w i l l v e n t i l a t e the room acting as an a i r conditioner i n the summer. In North America, i t has an ingrained symbolism of "hearth and home" (Faulkner; Gould). The hearth must be designed to handle the f i r e tools and screen, and provision PaCE^bBP &ALOOHY FP^VA E A C H <s>rw s p - . FIGURE sVi Balcony configurations. -98-FIGURE 5 7 . Garden apartment balcony: i t provides shade for ground l e v e l patio and has privacy of screen but allows l i g h t and a i r (Shannon Mews, Vancouver, B.C.). -99-needs to be made for wood storage. The location i s c r u c i a l as there should be a furniture grouping around i t with no through t r a f f i c patterns (Kennedy). MARKETABILITY) Because of the energy c r i s i s , the average person's need to f e e l at least pa r t l y independent of the u t i l i t y companies, and the deep symbolism and expression of family, the fireplace i s a popular sales feature. See figure 54. IV:12 PRIVATE OUTDOOR SPACES As density increase, private outdoor spaces have more importance i n terms of careful design and residence s a t i s f a c t i o n . In a singl e -family detached unit on a large l o t , the outdoor spaces are usually l e f t by the developer for the owner to shape. As l o t s get smaller, and as structures become multi-family, the remaining outdoor spaces need to be used with greater i n t e n s i t y . These spaces become a marginal item of great value. Every b i t of l i v i n g space must be squeezed from a l o t (Link). Molen as does Link, recommends that the outdoor spaces should be extensions and re f l e c t i o n s of indoor spaces - places for quiet and active l i v i n g , play, food preparation and consumption, relaxing, a t h l e t i c pursuits, plus gardening. The d e t a i l s such as l i g h t i n g , e l e c t r i c a l outlets, telephone hook-ups, and storage are important i n a well-used outdoor space (Link). The outside yard should not be less than 200-300 square feet (Cooper, 1975). In multi-family structures where balconies are provided, they should be at least 2 metres deep, and oriented away from each other for -100-FIGURE 58. Private outdoor spaces: the ground f l o o r i s partly screened with a brick fence and has a l e v e l change from the path. Second story balcony has r a i l i n g and wing w a l l . Note the angular walk. (Arbutus V i l l a g e , Vancouver, B.C.). FIGURE 59. Fenced patios: townhouse clusters u t i l i z e fenced areas j u t t i n g into the semi-public walk areas. In the background are the balconies of the apartment structure (Sharon Garden Apartments, Richmond, B.C.). -101-privacy (Vancouver). The surfaces of balconies should allow n a i l s , screws, planters and other 'personalizations' of the space. Privacy and ease of access to outdoor spaces are two measures of quality for outdoor spaces (Michelson, p. 100). DELAY PREVENTION) In multi-family projects, municipal planners are requiring usable outdoor spaces, and f a i l u r e to provide such may cause costly delays u n t i l provided (Molen; Vancouver). MARKETABILITY) Well designed private outdoor space which allows for a m u l t i p l i c i t y of a c t i v i t i e s i s an important sales feature of the unit. See figures 49, 55, 56, 57, 58, and 59. -102-REFERENCES Alexander, C , and Chermayeff, I. S., Community arid Privacy. Garden C i t y , New York: Double Day, 1963. Allsopp, B., Towards a Humane Architecture. London: Frederick Muller Ltd., 1974. B e l l , G., and Tyrwhitt, J . , (eds.), Human Identity i n the Urban  Environment. Baltimore: Penquin Books, Inc., 1972. Blake, P., Our Housing Mess...and What Can Be Done About I t . New York: I n s t i t u t e of Human Relations Press, 1974. Breckenfeld, G., Columbia and the New C i t i e s . New York: Ives Washburn, Inc., 1971. Breines, S., and Dean, W.J., The Pedestrian Revolution. New York: Vintage Books Edi t i o n , Random House, 1974. Burchell, R.W. (ed.), Frontiers of Planned Unit Development. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University, 1973. Burgess, R., Planner, Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t Planning Department. Vancouver, B.C.: Interview March 18, 1976. Burrage, R.H., and Morgan, E.G., Parking. Sugatuck, Connecticut: The Eno Foundation for Highway T r a f f i c Control, 1957. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Housing the Handicapped. Ottawa: Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 1974. Claus, J.R., and Claus, K.E., Visual Environment. Toronto: C o l l i e r -Macmillan, Canada Ltd., 1971. Clegg, P., Energy for the Home. Charlotte, Vermont: Garden Way Publishing, 1975. Cooper, C., Easter H i l l V i l l a g e . New York: Free Press, a Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., 1975. Cooper, C , "The House as Symbol of the Se l f " i n Lang, J . , Burnette, C , Moleski, W., and Vachon, D. (eds.), Designing for Human Behavior. Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross, Inc., 1974. DeChiara, J . , and Koppelman, L., Manual of Housing/Planning and Design  C r i t e r i a . E n g l e c l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975. Faulkner, R., and Faulkner, S., Inside Today's Home. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968. Foote, N.H., Abu-Lughod, J . , Foley, M.M., and Winnick, L., Housing  Choices and Housing Constraints. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1960. -103-Gans, H., People and Plans. New York: Basic Books, 1968. Gerardi, N., Here's a Zoning Story with a New Twist. House and Home, 1975 (March),47. Gerson, W., Patterns of Urban Liv i n g . Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970. | Goldsmith, S., Designing for the Disabled. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1967. Gould, M.E., The Early American House. Rutland, Vermont: C.E. Tuttle, 1965. Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t (GVRD), Compact Residential  Communities i n the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t (Background Paper). Vancouver, B.C.: GVRD Planning Department, 1974. Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t (GVRD), A Qualitative Checklist For Compact Housing. Vancouver, B.C.: GVRD Planning Department, 1975. i G r i f f i n , C.W., Energy Conservation i n Buildings. Washington, D.C.: The Construction Specification I n s t i t u t e , 1974. Halprin, L., Freeways. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1966. Hancock, V., Architect; Professor of Architecture, Idaho State University; Housing Developer. Pocatello, Idaho: interview, August 13, 1975. Harmon, O'Donnell, and Henniger, Associates Inc. (Technical Advisors), Innovations vs. Traditions i n Community Development. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land I n s t i t u t e , Technical B u l l e t i n #47, 1963. Hayes, R.W., Nobody Wants to Look at Garbage Cans or Pad Transformers. House and Home, 1973 (October), 43. Hayes, R.W., Setback Requirements: Part I I I . House and Home, 1972 ( A p r i l ) , 40. Hayward, D.G., "Psychological Factors i n the Use of Light and Lighting i n Buildings" i n Lang, J . , Bumette, C., Moleski, W., and Vachon, D. (eds.), Designing for Human Behavior. Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross, Inc., 1974. Heywood, P., Planning and Human Need. Newton Abbot, England: David and Charles, 1974. i Howard, E., Garden C i t i e s of Tomorrow. London: Faber and Faber, 1946. I l l i c h , I . , Energy and Equity. New York: Harper and Row, 1974. I l l i c h , I . , Tools For Con v i v i a l i t y . New York: Harper and Row, 1973. Jorgenson, J.D., C i v i l Engineer, University of B r i t i s h Columbia Physical Plant. Vancouver, B.C.: interview March 10, 1976. -104-Katz, R.D., Design of the Housing S i t e . Urbana, I l l i n o i s : Small Home Cou n c i l — B u i l d i n g Research Council, University of I l l i n o i s , 1966. Kennedy, R.W., The House. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1953. Leckie, J . , Masters, G., Whitehouse, H., and Young, L., Other Homes  and Garbage. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1975. Link, D.E. (ed.), Residential Designs. Boston: Cahners Books, 1972. Lynch, K., Si t e Planning. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1962. Malt, H.L., Furnishing the City. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970. Mason, J . , Memo: Changes to R-3 Zone. Pocatello, Idaho: City of Pocatello, Planning and Research Department, 1975 (June). McHarg, I.L., Design with Nature. Garden Cit y , New York: Double Day, 1971. McQuade, W., Two C i t i e s , New and Old, Show the Way to Urban Amenity. Fortune. 1975 (Ju l y ) , 92. Michelson, W., Man and His Urban Environment. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1970. M i t c h e l l , W.E., andi Pitman, R.E., Floor Plan Boo-Boos That Turn Off Buyers. House and Home, 1974 (October), 46. Molen, R.L., House, Plus Environment. Salt Lake Ci t y : Olympus Publishing Company, 1974. Morgan, J . , What i s the Best Role for Architects i n "the Housing Development Game"? Architectural Record, 1973 (January), 153. Morgan, J . , How YouiCan Work With Developers—and Actually Enjoy i t . A rchitectural Record, 1973 ( A p r i l ) , 153. Morris, R.M., and Mogey, J . , The Sociology of Housing. London: Routledge and Paul, 1965. Mumford, L., The Urban Prospect. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World, Inc., 1956. National Swedish I n s t i t u t e for Building Research, Quality of Dwellings and Housing Areas. Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksells Boktryckeri A.B., 1967. Newman, 0., Defensible Space. New York: Macmillan, 1972. Norcross, C , and Hysom, J . , Apartment Communities. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land I n s t i t u t e , Technical B u l l e t i n #61, 1968. Norcross, C , Open Space Communities i n the Market Place. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land I n s t i t u t e , Technical B u l l e t i n #57, 1966. -105-Pocatello, City of, Pocatell-Parks and Recreation Program. Pocatello, Idaho: Pocatello Parks and Recreation Department, 1974. Prenis, J . (ed.), Energy Book #1. Philadelphia: Running Press, 1975. Rahenkamp, J . , Contour Clustering Is A Better Way To Create Open Space, And I t Can Cut Costs Too. House and Home, 1971 (May), 39. Ramsey, C.G., and Sleeper, H.R., Architectural Graphic Standards. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1971. Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver, Alternative Forms of Housing. Vancouver, B.C.: Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver, 1975. Roberts, G., Director of the United States S o i l Conservation Service, Pocatello Office. Pocatello, Idaho: interview A p r i l 16, 1975. Rubenstein, H.M., A Guide to Site and Environmental Planning. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1969. Rutledge, A.J., Anatomy of a Park. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1971. Seaton, R.W., Marginal U t i l i t y and Multi-purposive Design i n Architecture. Vancouver, B.C.: University of B r i t i s h Columbia, School of Architecture, 1974 (October). Stahl, D.E., Condominium Testimony. Urban Land. 1975 ( A p r i l ) , 34. Stein, C , Toward New Towns For America. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1966. Stone, P.A., The Structure, Size and Costs of Urban Settlements. Cambridge, England: University P r i n t i n g House, 1973. Studley, G., and Wieland, E., The S u r f i c i a l Geology of the Pocatello  East Bench and I t s Environmental Implications. Pocatello, Idaho: Idaho State University, Geology Department Graduate Studies, 1975. Thomsen, C., How High to Rise. Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of  Architects, 1965 ( A p r i l ) , 18. Turner, J . C , and Fichter, R., Freedom to Bu i l d . New York: Macmillan Company, 1972. United States Postal Service, New Towns and the U.S. Postal Service. Washington, D.C.: Economic Analysis D i v i s i o n , Finance Department, 1973. Vancouver, City of, Urban Design Guidelines ( d r a f t ) . Vancouver, B.C.: West End Planning Department, 1974. Vaughn, T.M., A Planned Unit Development For The Magic Valley. Pocatello, Idaho: Idaho State University, Department of Architecture ( t h e s i s ) , 1974. -106-Whyte, W.H., Cluster Development. New York: American Conservation Association, 1964 ( A p r i l ) . Williams, W.R., Recreation Places. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corp., 1957. -107-RELATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Academic Planning, Office of, Capital Planning and Poli c y Procedures. Vancouver, B.C.: University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1973. Alexander, C , Houses Generated by Patterns. Berkeley: Center for Environmental Structure, 1968. Alexander, C , Ishikawa, S., and S i l v e r s t e i n , M., A Pattern Language  Which Generates Multi-service Centers. Berkeley: Center for Environ-mental Structure, 1968. American Public Health Association, Committee on the Hygiene of Housing, Planning the Home for Occupancy. Chicago: Public Admini-s t r a t i o n Service, 1950. American Public Health Association, Committee on the Hygiene of Housing, Planning the Neighborhood. Chicago: Public Administration Service, 1960. Ashihara, Y., Exterior Design i n Architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1970. Bailey, J . , (ed.), New Towns i n America. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1973. Barker, R.G., and Schoggen, P., Qualities of Community L i f e . San Francisco: Jossey-Boss, 1973. Barnett, J . , Urban Design as Public P o l i c y . New York: Architectural Record Books, 1974. Blumenfeld, H., The Modern Metropolis. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1971. Boericke, A., and Shapiro, B., Handmade Houses. San Francisco: Scrimshaw Press, 1973. Brody, M., Planning For People. London: Bedford Square Press, 1968. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), Site Planning Handbook. Ottawa: CMHC, 196 . Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), The Use and Design of Space i n the Home. Ottawa: CMHC, 1974. Clawson, M., Suburban Land Conversion i n the United States. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1971. Coates, G.J., and Moffett, K.M. (ed.), Response to Environment. Raleigh: North Carolina State University, Student Publications of the School of Design, 1969. Cornell University, Comprehensive P o l i c i e s for the Physical Planning and  Design of the Ithaca Campus of Cornell University. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University, 1972. Daniels, F., Direct Use of the Sun's Energy. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1964. -108-Environmental Planning Group, Inc., Neighborhood Analysis. Pocatello, Idaho: Bannock Development Council, 1969. Environmental Planning Group, Inc., Preliminary Comprehensive Plan. Pocatello, Idaho: Bannock Development Council, 1970. F a r r e l l , P.B., The Architect i n the Business of Development. Progressive  Architecture, reprints from The Architect as Developer, 197 . Federal Housing Administration (FHA), Suggested Legal Documents for PUD's. Washington, D.C.: FHA, 1965. Fein, A., Frederick Law 01mstead and the American Environmental Tradition. New York: George B r a z i l l a r , Inc., 1972. Fort, W.E., A v a i l a b i l i t y of Homes for Middle-Income Families. Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, Economics D i v i s i o n , 1975. Goldberg, M.A., Residential Developers' Behavior. Vancouver, B.C.: University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration, 1974. Graduate School of Design, Three Approaches to Environmental Resource  Analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University, Landscape Architecture Research Off i c e , 1967. Guideline Publications, Architectural Working Drawing Checklist I I . Orinda, C a l i f o r n i a : Guideline Publications, 1974. H a l l , E.T., Hidden Dimension. Garden C i t y , New York: Double Day and Company, 1966. Halpern, J.M., The Changing V i l l a g e Community. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1967. Halprin, L., The R.S.V.P. Cycles. New York: George B r a z i l l e r , 1970. Haraman, O'Donnell, and Henniger, Associates Inc., New Approaches to  Residential Land Development. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land I n s t i t u t e , Technical B u l l e t i n #40, 1961. Hearst, A., Highland Neighborhood Analysis (draft ) . Pocatello, Idaho: City of Pocatello, Planning and Research Department, 1975. How 3 Builders Made 1974 a Bonus Year. House and Home, 1975 (March), 58. Housing and Urban Development (HUD), PUD With A Home Owners Association. Washington, D.C.: Federal Housing Administration, Land Planning B u l l e t i n #6, 1973. ' James, J.R., Residential Densities and Housing Layouts. Town and Country Planning, 1967 (December), 35. Katz, R.D., Intensity of Development and L i v a b i l i t y of Multi-family  Housing Projects. Washington, D.C.: Federal Housing Administration, 1963. -109-Kennedy, R.W., The House. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1953. I Kouskolas, V., and L y t l e , R.B. (eds.), Urban Housing and Transportation. Detroit: C i v i l Engineering Department, Wayne State University, 1975. Lang, J . , Burnett, C , Moleski, W., and Vachon, D. (eds.), Design for  Human Behavior. Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Inc., 1974. Ledermann, A., and Trachsel, A., Creative Playgrounds and Recreation  Centers. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1960. Love, G.A., and Love, R.M. (eds.), Ecological C r i s i s . New York: Harcourt Brace Hovanovich, Inc., 1970. Mace, R.L., and Wicker, W.J., Do Single Family Homes Pay Their Way? Urban Land I n s t i t u t e , Research Monograph #15, 1968. Malt, H.L., Furnishing the Ci t y . New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1970. McCue, G.M., Ewald, W.R., and The Midwest Research I n s t i t u t e , Creating the Human Environment, Urbana, I l l i n o i s : University of I l l i n o i s Press, 1970. M e r r i l , R., Gage, T., Missar, C , and Bukey, J . (eds.), The Energy Primer. Menlo Park, C a l i f o r n i a : Portula I n s t i t u t e , 1974. Moore, C., A l l e n , G., and Lyndon, D., The Place of Houses. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1974. Moss, J.H., Project'Manager for P i l l a r Construction. Vancouver, B.C.: Interview, March 18, 1976. Neutra, R., Richardl Neutra on Building Mystery. Scarsdale, New York: Morgan and Morgan, 1951. Notter, G. (compiled the Study), Comparative Housing Study. Cambridge: Harvard University, Graduate School of Design, 1958. Nottridge, H.E., The Sociology of Urban L i v i n g . New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972. Perin, C , With Man i n Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1970. Pocatello, City of, iPlanned Unit Development Ordinance #1704. Pocatello, Idaho: Planning and Research Department, 1972. Pocatello, C i t y of, Pocatello Appendix. Pocatello, Idaho: Planning and Research Department, 1975. Pocatello, City of, Pocatello/Bannock County Economic Impact. Pocatello, Idaho: Idaho State University, Economics Department, 1975. Pocatello, City of, Subdivision Ordinance #1594. Pocatello, Idaho: Planning and Research Department, 1969. Pocatello, City of, The West Hawthorne and The South Northwest Acres  Neighborhood Area Study. Pocatello, Idaho: Planning and Research Department, 1975. -110-Pocatello, City of. Zoning Ordinance #1567. Pocatello, Idaho: Planning and Research Department, 1971. Portneuf S o i l and Water Conservation D i s t r i c t , Sediment and Erosion  Control Guide. Pocatello, Idaho: Portneuf S o i l and Water Conservation D i s t r i c t , 1972. Pynoos, J . , Schafer, R., and Hartman, C.W. (eds.), Housing Urban America Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1973. Rapoport, A., House Form and Culture. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969. Raskin, E., Architecture and People. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1974. Schumacher, E.F., Small Is Beautiful. New York: Harper Colophon Books (Harper and Row), 1973. Shelter. Bolinas, C a l i f o r n i a : Shelter Publications, Random House (Distributors), 1973. Seney, N., What's Wrong with Standard Floor Plans? Better Homes and  Gardens, 1968 (November), 46. Simond, J.O., Landscape Architecture. New York: F.W. Dodge Corporation, 1961. Sommer, R., Personal Space. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1969. Stewart, W., The Condominium Conundrum. MacLeans 1975 (March), 88. Taundy, C.R.V. (ed.), Landscape and Human L i f e . Amsterdam: Djambatan, 1966. University of B r i t i s h Columbia Centre for Continuing Education, and Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t Planning Department, Seminar on the Approvals  Process for Medium Density Residential Development. Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia: Centre for Continuing Education, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, January, 1976. Von Eckhardt, W., A Place to Live. New York: Delacorte Press, 1967. White, W.J., Mixed-Income Housing i n Massachusetts. Urban Land, 1975 (March), 34. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0100137/manifest

Comment

Related Items